Surgical peri-implantitis treatment with and without guided bone regeneration. A randomized controlled trial

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the efficacy of reconstructive peri-implantitis treatment.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Forty participants, with peri-implantitis and a contained intraosseous defect, were randomized to access flap (control) or access flap with xenograft and collagen membrane (test). All received systemic antimicrobials. Blinded examiners recorded probing depths (PD), bleeding and suppuration on probing (BOP & SOP), soft tissue levels, and marginal bone levels (MBL) at baseline and 12 months. Patient reported outcomes were recorded. The primary outcome was PD change.

RESULTS

All 40 participants (40 implants) completed the 12-month study. The mean (standard deviation) PD reduction (deepest site) was 4.2 (1.8) mm in the control and 3.7 (1.9) mm in the test group. MBL gain (deepest site) was 1.7 (1.6) mm in the control and 2.4 (1.4) mm in the test group. Absence of BOP & SOP was observed at 60% of both control and test implants. Buccal recession was 0.9 (1.6) mm in the control and 0.4 (1.1) mm in the test group. A successful outcome (absence of PD ≥ 5 mm with BOP, absence of SOP and absence of progressive bone loss) was achieved for 90% of the control and 85% of test group implants. No statistically significant differences in clinical or radiographic parameters were found between treatment groups. 30% of participants experienced mild gastro-intestinal disturbances. Reporting followed CONSORT guidelines.

CONCLUSION

Similar clinical and radiographic improvements at 12 months were observed with high levels of patient satisfaction for both the access flap and xenograft covered by collagen membrane groups. Registered clinical trials.gov. ID:NCT03163602 (23/05/2017).

Supportive care for the prevention of disease recurrence/progression following peri-implantitis treatment: A systematic review

OBJECTIVES

This systematic review aimed to evaluate the efficacy of supportive care provision, frequency and protocol in patients treated for peri-implantitis, as reported in prospective and retrospective studies of at least 3-years duration.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A systematic search of three electronic databases was undertaken up to 21 July 2022 and supplemented by hand-search to identify studies that included participants treated for peri-implantitis and followed for at least 3 years. Owing to high heterogeneity, a meta-analysis was not appropriate, and therefore, data and risk of bias were explored qualitatively. PRISMA guidelines for reporting were followed.

RESULTS

The search identified 2596 studies. Of 270 records selected during screening, 255 were excluded through independent review and 15 studies (10 prospective and 5 retrospective, with at least 20 patients) were retained for qualitative assessments. Study designs, population characteristics, supportive care protocols and reported outcomes varied markedly. Thirteen of the 15 studies had low risk of bias. Supportive peri-implant care (SPIC) following different surgical peri-implantitis treatment protocols and with recall intervals varying between 2 months and annually resulted in peri-implant tissue stability (no disease recurrence or progression) ranging from 24.4% to 100% at patient level and from 28.3% to 100% at implant level. Sevenhundred and eighty-five patients with 790 implants were included in this review.

CONCLUSIONS

Provision of SPIC following peri-implantitis therapy may prevent disease recurrence or progression. Insufficient evidence is available to identify (i) a specific supportive care protocol for secondary prevention of peri-implantitis, (ii) the effect of adjunctive local antiseptic agents in the secondary prevention of peri-implantitis and (iii) the impact of frequency of supportive care measures. Prospective, randomised, controlled studies designed to evaluate supportive care protocols are needed in future.

Occurrence, associated factors and soft tissue reconstructive therapy for buccal soft tissue dehiscence at dental implants: Consensus report of group 3 of the DGI/SEPA/Osteology Workshop

OBJECTIVES

To systematically assess the literature and report on (1) the frequency of occurrence of buccal soft tissue dehiscence (BSTD) at implants, (2) factors associated with the occurrence of BSTD and (3) treatment outcomes of reconstructive therapy for the coverage of BSTD.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Two systematic reviews addressing focused questions related to implant BSTD occurrence, associated factors and the treatment outcomes of BSTD coverage served as the basis for group discussions and the consensus statements. The main findings of the systematic reviews, consensus statements and implications for clinical practice and for future research were formulated within group 3 and were further discussed and reached final approval within the plenary session.

RESULTS

Buccally positioned implants were the factor most strongly associated with the risk of occurrence of BSTD, followed by thin tissue phenotype. At immediate implants, it was identified that the use of a connective tissue graft (CTG) may act as a protective factor for BSTD. Coverage of BSTD may be achieved with a combination of a coronally advanced flap (CAF) and a connective tissue graft, with or without prosthesis modification/removal, although feasibility of the procedure depends upon multiple local and patient-related factors. Soft tissue substitutes showed limited BSTD coverage.

CONCLUSION

Correct three-dimensional (3D) positioning of the implant is of utmost relevance to prevent the occurrence of BSTD. If present, BSTD may be covered by CAF +CTG, however the evidence comes from a low number of observational studies. Therefore, future research is needed for the development of further evidence-based clinical recommendations.

Peri-implant mucositis

OBJECTIVES

This narrative review was prepared for the 2017 World Workshop of the American Academy of Periodontology and European Federation of Periodontology to address key questions related to the clinical condition of peri-implant mucositis, including: 1) the definition of peri-implant mucositis, 2) conversion of peri-implant health to the biofilm-induced peri-implant mucositis lesion, 3) reversibility of peri-implant mucositis, 4) the long-standing peri-implant mucositis lesion, 5) similarities and differences between peri-implant mucositis at implants and gingivitis at teeth, and 6) risk indicators/factors for peri-implant mucositis.

METHODS

A literature search of MEDLINE (PubMed) and The Cochrane Library up to and including July 31, 2016, was carried out using the search strategy (peri-implant[All Fields] AND ("mucositis"[MeSH Terms] OR "mucositis"[All Fields])) OR (periimplant[All Fields] AND mucosits[All Fields]). Prospective, retrospective, and cross-sectional studies and review papers that focused on risk factors/indicators for peri-implant mucositis as well as experimental peri-implant mucositis studies in animals and humans were included.

FINDINGS

Peri-implant mucositis is an inflammatory lesion of the soft tissues surrounding an endosseous implant in the absence of loss of supporting bone or continuing marginal bone loss. A cause-and-effect relationship between experimental accumulation of bacterial biofilms around titanium dental implants and the development of an inflammatory response has been demonstrated. The experimental peri-implant mucositis lesion is characterized by an inflammatory cell infiltrate present within the connective tissue lateral to the barrier epithelium. In long-standing peri-implant mucositis, the inflammatory cell infiltrate is larger in size than in the early (3-week) experimental peri-implant mucositis lesion. Biofilm-induced peri-implant mucositis is reversible at the host biomarker level once biofilm control is reinstituted. Reversal of the clinical signs of inflammation may take longer than 3 weeks. Factors identified as risk indicators for peri-implant mucositis include biofilm accumulation, smoking, and radiation. Further evidence is required for potential risk factors, including diabetes, lack of keratinized mucosa, and presence of excess luting cement.

CONCLUSIONS

Peri-implant mucositis is caused by biofilm accumulation which disrupts the host-microbe homeostasis at the implant-mucosa interface, resulting in an inflammatory lesion. Peri-implant mucositis is a reversible condition at the host biomarker level. Therefore, the clinical implication is that optimal biofilm removal is a prerequisite for the prevention and management of peri-implant mucositis. An understanding of peri-implant mucositis is important because it is considered a precursor for peri-implantitis.

Peri-implant diseases and conditions: Consensus report of workgroup 4 of the 2017 World Workshop on the Classification of Periodontal and Peri-Implant Diseases and Conditions

A classification for peri-implant diseases and conditions was presented. Focused questions on the characteristics of peri-implant health, peri-implant mucositis, peri-implantitis, and soft- and hard-tissue deficiencies were addressed. Peri-implant health is characterized by the absence of erythema, bleeding on probing, swelling, and suppuration. It is not possible to define a range of probing depths compatible with health; Peri-implant health can exist around implants with reduced bone support. The main clinical characteristic of peri-implant mucositis is bleeding on gentle probing. Erythema, swelling, and/or suppuration may also be present. An increase in probing depth is often observed in the presence of peri-implant mucositis due to swelling or decrease in probing resistance. There is strong evidence from animal and human experimental studies that plaque is the etiological factor for peri-implant mucositis. Peri-implantitis is a plaque-associated pathological condition occurring in tissues around dental implants, characterized by inflammation in the peri-implant mucosa and subsequent progressive loss of supporting bone. Peri-implantitis sites exhibit clinical signs of inflammation, bleeding on probing, and/or suppuration, increased probing depths and/or recession of the mucosal margin in addition to radiographic bone loss. The evidence is equivocal regarding the effect of keratinized mucosa on the long-term health of the peri-implant tissue. It appears, however, that keratinized mucosa may have advantages regarding patient comfort and ease of plaque removal. Case definitions in day-to-day clinical practice and in epidemiological or disease-surveillance studies for peri-implant health, peri-implant mucositis, and peri-implantitis were introduced. The proposed case definitions should be viewed within the context that there is no generic implant and that there are numerous implant designs with different surface characteristics, surgical and loading protocols. It is recommended that the clinician obtain baseline radiographic and probing measurements following the completion of the implant-supported prosthesis.

Peri-implant mucositis

OBJECTIVES

This narrative review was prepared for the 2017 World Workshop of the American Academy of Periodontology and European Federation of Periodontology to address key questions related to the clinical condition of peri-implant mucositis, including: 1) the definition of peri-implant mucositis, 2) conversion of peri-implant health to the biofilm-induced peri-implant mucositis lesion, 3) reversibility of peri-implant mucositis, 4) the long-standing peri-implant mucositis lesion, 5) similarities and differences between peri-implant mucositis at implants and gingivitis at teeth, and 6) risk indicators/factors for peri-implant mucositis.

METHODS

A literature search of MEDLINE (PubMed) and The Cochrane Library up to and including July 31, 2016, was carried out using the search strategy (peri-implant[All Fields] AND ("mucositis"[MeSH Terms] OR "mucositis"[All Fields])) OR (periimplant[All Fields] AND mucosits[All Fields]). Prospective, retrospective, and cross-sectional studies and review papers that focused on risk factors/indicators for peri-implant mucositis as well as experimental peri-implant mucositis studies in animals and humans were included.

FINDINGS

Peri-implant mucositis is an inflammatory lesion of the soft tissues surrounding an endosseous implant in the absence of loss of supporting bone or continuing marginal bone loss. A cause-and-effect relationship between experimental accumulation of bacterial biofilms around titanium dental implants and the development of an inflammatory response has been demonstrated. The experimental peri-implant mucositis lesion is characterized by an inflammatory cell infiltrate present within the connective tissue lateral to the barrier epithelium. In long-standing peri-implant mucositis, the inflammatory cell infiltrate is larger in size than in the early (3-week) experimental peri-implant mucositis lesion. Biofilm-induced peri-implant mucositis is reversible at the host biomarker level once biofilm control is reinstituted. Reversal of the clinical signs of inflammation may take longer than 3 weeks. Factors identified as risk indicators for peri-implant mucositis include biofilm accumulation, smoking, and radiation. Further evidence is required for potential risk factors, including diabetes, lack of keratinized mucosa, and presence of excess luting cement.

CONCLUSIONS

Peri-implant mucositis is caused by biofilm accumulation which disrupts the host-microbe homeostasis at the implant-mucosa interface, resulting in an inflammatory lesion. Peri-implant mucositis is a reversible condition at the host biomarker level. Therefore, the clinical implication is that optimal biofilm removal is a prerequisite for the prevention and management of peri-implant mucositis. An understanding of peri-implant mucositis is important because it is considered a precursor for peri-implantitis.

Peri-implant diseases and conditions: Consensus report of workgroup 4 of the 2017 World Workshop on the Classification of Periodontal and Peri-Implant Diseases and Conditions

A classification for peri-implant diseases and conditions was presented. Focused questions on the characteristics of peri-implant health, peri-implant mucositis, peri-implantitis, and soft- and hard-tissue deficiencies were addressed. Peri-implant health is characterized by the absence of erythema, bleeding on probing, swelling, and suppuration. It is not possible to define a range of probing depths compatible with health; Peri-implant health can exist around implants with reduced bone support. The main clinical characteristic of peri-implant mucositis is bleeding on gentle probing. Erythema, swelling, and/or suppuration may also be present. An increase in probing depth is often observed in the presence of peri-implant mucositis due to swelling or decrease in probing resistance. There is strong evidence from animal and human experimental studies that plaque is the etiological factor for peri-implant mucositis. Peri-implantitis is a plaque-associated pathological condition occurring in tissues around dental implants, characterized by inflammation in the peri-implant mucosa and subsequent progressive loss of supporting bone. Peri-implantitis sites exhibit clinical signs of inflammation, bleeding on probing, and/or suppuration, increased probing depths and/or recession of the mucosal margin in addition to radiographic bone loss. The evidence is equivocal regarding the effect of keratinized mucosa on the long-term health of the peri-implant tissue. It appears, however, that keratinized mucosa may have advantages regarding patient comfort and ease of plaque removal. Case definitions in day-to-day clinical practice and in epidemiological or disease-surveillance studies for peri-implant health, peri-implant mucositis, and peri-implantitis were introduced. The proposed case definitions should be viewed within the context that there is no generic implant and that there are numerous implant designs with different surface characteristics, surgical and loading protocols. It is recommended that the clinician obtain baseline radiographic and probing measurements following the completion of the implant-supported prosthesis.

The therapy of peri-implantitis: a systematic review

PURPOSE

To evaluate the success of treatments aimed at the resolution of peri-implantitis in patients with osseointegrated implants.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The potentially relevant literature was assessed independently by two reviewers to identify case series and comparative studies describing the treatment of peri-implantitis with a follow-up of at least 3 months. Medline, Embase, and The Cochrane Library were searched. For the purposes of this review, a composite criterion for successful treatment outcome was used which comprised implant survival with mean probing depth < 5 mm and no further bone loss.

RESULTS

A total of 43 publications were included: 4 papers describing 3 nonsurgical case series, 13 papers describing 10 comparative studies of nonsurgical interventions, 15 papers describing 14 surgical case series, and 11 papers describing 6 comparative studies of surgical interventions. No trials comparing nonsurgical with surgical interventions were found. The length of follow-up varied from 3 months to 7.5 years. Due to the heterogeneity of study designs, peri-implantitis case definitions, outcome variables, and reporting, no meta-analysis was performed. Eleven studies could be evaluated according to a composite success criterion. Successful treatment outcomes at 12 months were reported in 0% to 100% of patients treated in 9 studies and in 75% to 93% of implants treated in 2 studies. Commonalities in treatment approaches between studies included (1) a pretreatment phase, (2) cause-related therapy, and (3) a maintenance care phase.

CONCLUSIONS

While the available evidence does not allow any specific recommendations for the therapy of peri-implantitis, successful treatment outcomes at 12 months were reported in a majority of patients in 7 studies. Although favorable short-term outcomes were reported in many studies, lack of disease resolution as well as progression or recurrence of disease and implant loss despite treatment were also reported. The reported outcomes must be viewed in the context of the varied peri-implantitis case definitions and severity of disease included as well as the heterogeneity in study design, length of follow-up, and exclusion/inclusion criteria.

Surgical and nonsurgical periodontal therapy. Learned and unlearned concepts

This review aims to highlight concepts relating to nonsurgical and surgical periodontal therapy, which have been learned and unlearned over the past few decades. A number of treatment procedures, such as gingival curettage and aggressive removal of contaminated root cementum, have been unlearned. Advances in technology have resulted in the introduction of a range of new methods for use in nonsurgical periodontal therapy, including machine-driven instruments, lasers, antimicrobial photodynamic therapy and local antimicrobial-delivery devices. However, these methods have not been shown to offer significant benefits over and above nonsurgical debridement using hand instruments. The method of debridement is therefore largely dependent on the preferences of the operator and the patient. Recent evidence indicates that specific systemic antimicrobials may be indicated for use as adjuncts to nonsurgical debridement in patients with advanced disease. Full-mouth disinfection protocols have been proven to be a relevant treatment option. We have learned that while nonsurgical and surgical methods result in similar long-term treatment outcomes, surgical therapy results in greater probing-depth reduction and clinical attachment gain in initially deep pockets. The surgical technique chosen seems to have limited influence upon changes in clinical attachment gain. What has not changed is the importance of thorough mechanical debridement and optimal plaque control for successful nonsurgical and surgical periodontal therapy.

Preservation of crestal bone by implant design. A comparative study in minipigs

OBJECTIVES

To compare crestal bone modeling at three bone level design implants; Astra Tech Osseospeed(™) Implant (AOI), Straumann(®) Bone Level Implant (SBLI) and NobelReplace(™) Tapered Groovy Implant (NBTI).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

In 12 minipigs one implant of each design was placed on each side of the mandible with submerged healing. The implant platform was placed at the level of the crest (Group 0), and 1 mm above the crest (Group + 1 mm). In addition, one Straumann(®) Tissue Level Implant STLI was placed as a control on each side of the mandible. At 4 weeks, six animals were sacrificed. In the remaining six animals healing abutments were connected until 12 weeks. Clinical, radiographic, and histologic analyses were made. ANOVA and Mann-Whitney U-tests were used to evaluate differences in bone levels between implant designs.

RESULTS

At 4 weeks there was no statistically significant difference in bone changes between implant designs. At 12 weeks implants in Group + 1 mm had minimal bone changes with no differences between implant designs. In Group 0, the AOI and SBLI preserved more crestal bone than NBTI (P < 0.01). Mean distance from the implant platform to the buccal bone was -0.1 ± 0.2 mm for AOI, -0.3 ± 0.3 mm for SBLI, and -1.0 ± 0.3 mm for NBTI. Mean radiographic bone levels from the implant platform were -0.1 ± 0.4 mm for AOI, 0.0 ± 0.3 mm for SBLI and -0.9 ± 0.8 mm for NBTI.

CONCLUSION

Greater bone preservation was observed for the AOI and SBLI compared with the NBTI.

Geographic modelling of jaw fracture rates in Australia: a methodological model for healthcare planning

BACKGROUND/AIM

While Australians are one of the healthiest populations in the world, inequalities in access to health care and health outcomes exist for Indigenous Australians and Australians living in rural or urban areas of the country. Hence, the purpose of this study was to develop an innovative methodological approach for predicting the incidence rates of jaw fractures and estimating the demand for oral health services within Australia.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Population data were obtained from the Australian Bureau of Statistics and was divided across Australia by statistical local area and related to a validated remoteness index. Every episode of discharge from all hospitals in Western Australia for the financial years 1999/2000 to 2004/2005 indicating a jaw fracture as the principle oral condition, as classified by the International Classification of Disease (ICD-10AM), was the inclusion criterion for the study. Hospitalization data were obtained from the Western Australian Hospital Morbidity Data System.

RESULTS

The model estimated almost 10 times higher jaw fracture rates for Indigenous populations than their non-Indigenous counterparts. Moreover, incidence of jaw fractures was higher among Indigenous people living in rural and remote areas compared with their urban and semi-urban counterparts. In contrast, in the non-Indigenous population, higher rates of jaw fractures were estimated for urban and semi-urban inhabitants compared with their rural and remote counterparts.

CONCLUSIONS

This geographic modelling technique could be improved by methodological refinements and further research. It will be useful in developing strategies for health management and reducing the burden of jaw fractures and the cost of treatment within Australia. This model will also have direct implications for strategic planning for prevention and management policies in Australia aimed at reducing the inequalities gap both in terms of geography as well as Aboriginality.

Comparative biology of chronic and aggressive periodontitis vs. peri-implantitis

This review was undertaken to address the similarities and dissimilarities between the two disease entities of periodontitis and peri-implantitis. The overall analysis of the literature on the etiology and pathogenesis of periodontitis and peri-implantitis provided an impression that these two diseases have more similarities than differences. First, the initiation of the two diseases is dependent on the presence of a biofilm containing pathogens. While the microbiota associated with periodontitis is rich in gram-negative bacteria, a similar composition has been identified in peri-implant diseases. However, increasing evidence suggests that S. aureus may be an important pathogen in the initiation of some cases of peri-implantitis. Further research into the role of this gram-positive facultative coccus, and other putative pathogens, in the development of peri-implantitis is indicated. While the initial host response to the bacterial challenge in peri-implant mucositis appears to be identical to that encountered in gingivitis, persistent biofilm accumulation may elicit a more pronounced inflammatory response in peri-implant mucosal tissues than in the dentogingival unit. This may be a result of structural differences (such as vascularity and fibroblast-to-collagen ratios). When periodontitis and peri-implantitis were produced experimentally by applying plaque-retaining ligatures, the progression of mucositis to peri-implantitis followed a very similar sequence of events as the development of gingivitis to periodontitis. However, some of the peri-implantitis lesions appeared to have periods of rapid progression, in which the infective lesion reached the alveolar bone marrow. It is therefore reasonable to assume that peri-implantitis in humans may also display periods of accelerated destruction that are more pronounced than that observed in cases of chronic periodontitis. From a clinical point of view the identified and confirmed risk factors for periodontitis may be considered as identical to those for peri-implantitis. In addition, patients susceptible to periodontitis appear to be more susceptible to peri-implantitis than patients without a history of periodontitis. As both periodontitis and peri-implantitis are opportunistic infections, their therapy must be antiinfective in nature. The same clinical principles apply to debridement of the lesions and the maintenance of an infection-free oral cavity. However, in daily practice, such principles may occasionally be difficult to apply in peri-implantitis treatment. Owing to implant surface characteristics and limited access to the microbial habitats, surgical access may be required more frequently, and at an earlier stage, in periimplantitis treatment than in periodontal therapy. In conclusion, it is evident that periodontitis and peri-implantitis are not fundamentally different from the perspectives of etiology, pathogenesis, risk assessment, diagnosis and therapy. Nevertheless, some difference in the host response to these two infections may explain the occasional rapid progression of peri-implantitis lesions. Consequently, a diagnosed peri-implantitis should be treated without delay.

Bacteraemia due to dental flossing

AIMS

The aims of this study were to (1) investigate the incidence of bacteraemia following flossing in subjects with chronic periodontitis or periodontal health; (2) identify the micro-organisms in detected bacteraemias; and (3) identify any patient or clinical factors associated with such bacteraemia.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Baseline blood samples were obtained from 30 individuals with chronic periodontitis (17 M:13 F, 29-75 years) and 30 with periodontal health (17 M:13 F, 28-71 years) following a non-invasive examination. Each subject's teeth were then flossed in a standardized manner and blood samples obtained 30 s and 10 min. after flossing cessation. Blood samples were cultured in a BACTEC system and positive samples subcultured for identification.

RESULTS

Forty per cent of periodontitis subjects and 41% of periodontally healthy subjects tested positive for bacteraemia following flossing. Viridans streptococci, which are commonly implicated in infective endocarditis (IE), were isolated from 19% of positive subjects and accounted for 35% of microbial isolates. Twenty per cent of subjects had a detectable bacteraemia at 10 min. post-flossing. No patient or clinical factors were significantly associated with post-flossing bacteraemia.

CONCLUSIONS

Dental flossing can produce bacteraemia in periodontally healthy and periodontally diseased individuals at a rate comparable with that caused by some dental treatments for which antibiotic prophylaxis is given to prevent IE.

History of treated periodontitis and smoking as risks for implant therapy

PURPOSE

The aim of this review was to evaluate a history of treated periodontitis and smoking, both alone and combined, as risk factors for adverse dental implant outcomes.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A literature search of MEDLINE (Ovid) and EMBASE from January 1, 1966, to June 30, 2008, was performed, and the outcome variables implant survival, implant success, occurrence of peri-implantitis and marginal bone loss were evaluated.

RESULTS

Considerable heterogeneity in study design was found, and few studies accounted for confounding variables. For patients with a history of treated periodontitis, the majority of studies reported implant survival rates > 90%. Three cohort studies showed a higher risk of peri-implantitis in patients with a history of treated periodontitis compared with those without a history of periodontitis (reported odds ratios from 3.1 to 4.7). In three of four systematic reviews, smoking was found to be a significant risk for adverse implant outcome. While the majority of studies reported implant survival rates ranging from 80% to 96% in smokers, most studies found statistically significantly lower survival rates than for nonsmokers.

CONCLUSIONS

There is an increased risk of peri-implantitis in smokers compared with nonsmokers (reported odds ratios from 3.6 to 4.6). The combination of a history of treated periodontitis and smoking increases the risk of implant failure and peri-implant bone loss.

Diagnosis and management of peri-implant diseases

Peri-implant diseases are inflammatory lesions which may affect the peri-implant mucosa only (peri-implant mucositis) or also result in loss of supporting bone (peri-implantitis). Peri-implantitis may lead to loss of the implant. Diagnosis of peri-implant disease requires the use of conventional probing to identify the presence of bleeding on probing, and suppuration, both signs of clinical inflammation. Radiographs are required to detect loss of supporting bone. Baseline probing measurements and radiographs should be obtained once the restoration of the implant is completed to allow longitudinal monitoring of peri-implant conditions. Two cross-sectional reports from Sweden indicate that the prevalence of peri-implant disease is high. Smokers and patients who have a history of periodontitis are more at risk for peri-implant disease. The main goal of treatment of peri-implant disease is to control the infection and to prevent disease progression. A number of studies have documented the successful treatment of peri-implant mucositis combining mechanical debridement and chemical plaque control. There is evidence supporting antimicrobial treatment regimens in combination with non-surgical or surgical debridement for peri-implantitis treatment. Long-term data to support these treatment protocols is limited. Whilst it is possible to treat peri-implantitis, prevention is the goal of supportive therapy.

Adjunctive local antibiotic therapy in the treatment of peri-implantitis II: clinical and radiographic outcomes

AIM

To monitor over 12 months clinical and radiographic changes occurring after adjunctive local delivery of minocycline microspheres for the treatment of peri-implantitis.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

In 25 partially edentulous subjects, 31 implants diagnosed with peri-implantitis were treated. Three weeks after oral hygiene instruction, mechanical debridement and local antiseptic cleansing using 0.2% chlorhexidine gel, baseline (Day 0) parameters were recorded. Minocycline microspheres (Arestin) were locally delivered to each implant site with bone loss and a probing pocket depth (PPD) >or=5 mm. Rescue therapy with Arestin was allowed at Days 180 and 270 at any site exhibiting an increase in PPD>or=2 mm from the previous visit. The following clinical parameters were recorded at four sites/implant at Day 0, 10, 30, 60, 90, 180, 270 and 360: PPD, clinical attachment level (CAL), bleeding on probing (BOP) and plaque index (PlI).

RESULTS

Six implants in six subjects were either rescued or exited because of persisting active peri-implantitis. Successful implants showed a statistically significant reduction in both PPD and percentage of sites with BOP between baseline and Day 360 (P<0.05). At mesial implant sites, the mean PPD reduction amounted to 1.6 mm (95% CI: 0.9-2.2 mm, P<0.001) and was accompanied by a statistically significant reduction of the BOP value (P<0.001). Binary regression analysis showed that the clinical parameters and smoking history could not discriminate between successfully treated and rescued or exited implants at any observation time point.

CONCLUSION

Non-surgical mechanical treatment of peri-implantitis lesions with adjunctive local delivery of microencapsulated minocycline led to positive effects on clinical parameters up to 12 months.

Antimicrobial therapy using a local drug delivery system (Arestin) in the treatment of peri-implantitis. I: Microbiological outcomes

OBJECTIVES

To assess the microbiological outcome of local administration of minocycline hydrochloride microspheres 1 mg (Arestin) in cases with peri-implantitis and with a follow-up period of 12 months.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

After debridement, and local administration of chlorhexidine gel, peri-implantitis cases were treated with local administration of minocycline microspheres (Arestin). The DNA-DNA checkerboard hybridization method was used to detect bacterial presence during the first 360 days of therapy.

RESULTS

At Day 10, lower bacterial loads for 6/40 individual bacteria including Actinomyces gerensceriae (P<0.1), Actinomyces israelii (P<0.01), Actinomyces naeslundi type 1 (P<0.01) and type 2 (P<0.03), Actinomyces odontolyticus (P<0.01), Porphyromonas gingivalis (P<0.01) and Treponema socranskii (P<0.01) were found. At Day 360 only the levels of Actinobacillus actinomycetemcomitans were lower than at baseline (mean difference: 1x10(5); SE difference: 0.34x10(5), 95% CI: 0.2x10(5) to 1.2x10(5); P<0.03). Six implants were lost between Days 90 and 270. The microbiota was successfully controlled in 48%, and with definitive failures (implant loss and major increase in bacterial levels) in 32% of subjects.

CONCLUSIONS

At study endpoint, the impact of Arestin on A. actinomycetemcomitans was greater than the impact on other pathogens. Up to Day 180 reductions in levels of Tannerella forsythia, P. gingivalis, and Treponema denticola were also found. Failures in treatment could not be associated with the presence of specific pathogens or by the total bacterial load at baseline. Statistical power analysis suggested that a case control study would require approximately 200 subjects.

Disease progression: identification of high-risk groups and individuals for periodontitis

AIMS

While the role of bacteria in the initiation of periodontitis is primary, a range of host-related factors influence the onset, clinical presentation and rate of progression of disease. The objectives of this review are (1) to present evidence for individual predictive factors associated with a patient's susceptibility to progression of periodontitis and (2) to describe the use of prognostic models aimed at identifying high-risk groups and individuals in a clinical setting.

METHODS

Relevant publications in the English language were identified after Medline and PubMed database searches. Because of a paucity of longitudinal studies investigating factors including clinical, demographic, environmental, behavioural, psychosocial, genetic, systemic and microbiologic parameters to identify individuals at risk for disease progression, some association studies were also included in this review.

FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS

Cigarette smoking is a strong predictor of progressive periodontitis, the effect of which is dose related. High levels of specific bacteria have been predictive of progressive periodontitis in some studies but not all. Diabetics with poor glycaemic control have an increased risk for progression of periodontitis. The evidence for the effect of a number of putative factors including interleukin-1 genotype, osteoporosis and psychosocial factors is inconclusive and requires further investigation in prospective longitudinal studies. Specific and sensitive diagnostic tests for the identification of individuals susceptible to disease progression are not yet a reality. While factors assessed independently may not be valuable in predicting risk of future attachment loss, the combination of factors in a multifactorial model may be useful in identifying individuals at risk for disease progression. A number of multifactorial models for risk assessment, at a subject level have been developed but require validation in prospective longitudinal studies.

Effects of post-surgical cleansing protocols on early plaque control in periodontal and/or periimplant wound healing

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this RCT was to evaluate early wound healing following specific post-surgical care protocols.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Following periodontal flap surgery, 60 patients were randomly assigned to follow one of two post-surgical protocols. Subjects smoking >20 cigarettes per day were excluded. Patients following the control protocol rinsed twice daily for 1 min with 0.1% of chlorhexidine (CHX) for 4 weeks. In addition to CHX rinsing, patients assigned to the test protocol applied CHX locally using a special very soft surgical toothbrush (Chirugia) from days 3 to 14, and a soft toothbrush (Ultrasuave) from days 14 to 28, twice daily. Baseline measurements included gingival crevicular fluid (GCF) flow rate, probing depth, probing attachment level, presence of bleeding on probing and full-mouth plaque score. Measurements were repeated at 1, 2 and 4 weeks after surgery.

RESULTS

Both post-surgical protocols resulted in successful wound healing and optimal wound closure at 4 weeks. There were no statistical differences in the GCF flow rate between test and control protocols. There was a lower incidence of recession of > or =2 mm following the test protocol.

CONCLUSION

The use of specific post-surgical cleansing protocols including the introduction of mechanical cleansing at day 3, using local application of CHX in addition to daily rinsing with CHX may be recommended.

Association between periodontal and peri-implant conditions: a 10-year prospective study

OBJECTIVES

The aims of this study were to (1) compare prospectively the clinical and radiographic changes in periodontal and peri-implant conditions, (2) investigate the association of changes in periodontal parameters and peri-implant conditions over a mean observation period of 10 years (8-12 years) after implant installation, and (3) evaluate patient risk factors known to aggravate the periodontal conditions for their potential influence on the peri-implant tissue status.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Eighty-nine partially edentulous patients with a mean age of 58.9 years (28-88 years) were examined at 1 and 10 years after implant placement. The patients contributed with 179 implants that were placed after comprehensive periodontal treatment and restored with crowns or fixed partial dentures. One hundred and seventy-nine matching control teeth were chosen as controls. Also, the remaining teeth (n=1770) in the dentitions were evaluated. Data on smoking habits and general health aspects were collected at 1 and 10 years as well.

RESULTS

At 10 years, statistically significant differences existed between implants and matching control teeth with regard to most of the clinical and radiographic parameters (P<0.01) with the exception of plaque index (PII) and recession. Multiple regression analyses were performed to associate combinations of periodontal diagnostic parameters to the peri-implant conditions: probing attachment level (PAL) at implants at 10 years was associated with implant location, full-mouth probing pocket depth (PPD) and full-mouth PAL (P=0.0001, r2=0.36). PPD at implants at 10 years correlated to implant location, full-mouth PPD and full-mouth PAL (P<0.001, r2=0.47). Marginal bone level at implants at 10 years was significantly associated to smoking, general health condition, implant location, full-mouth PAL and change over time in full-mouth PPD (P<0.001, r2=0.39).

CONCLUSIONS

These results present evidence for the association between periodontal and peri-implant conditions and the changes in these tissues over 10 years in partially edentulous patients.

Antimicrobial treatment of peri-implant diseases

PURPOSE

To review the literature on the treatment of peri-implant diseases. Specific emphasis was placed on the use of antimicrobial therapy, defined as local or systemic administration of antiseptic and/or antibiotic agents.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A search of MEDLINE, the Cochrane Controlled Trials Register, and The Cochrane Health Group Specialized Register was conducted, and articles published in English until July 31, 2003, were included. The results of experimental animal studies and human research are presented.

RESULTS

A variety of antimicrobial treatment regimens in combination with nonsurgical or surgical debridement with and without regenerative therapy were reported. Use of antimicrobials varied between studies with respect to type of drug, dosage, delivery system, duration, and commencement of antibiotic administration. Patient compliance and adverse effects related to the antimicrobials were mostly not mentioned.

DISCUSSION

While the majority of the case reports and studies presented showed positive outcomes following antimicrobial treatment, there were no non-medicated controls included, so the relative effect of the antimicrobial agent(s) cannot be evaluated.

CONCLUSIONS

Although antimicrobials are widely used for the treatment of peri-implant diseases, evidence of their benefit is limited, and randomized, controlled human trials should be initiated where ethically possible. In addition, prospective cohort studies designed to monitor consecutive cases treated using specific treatment protocols are required.

Clinical course of chronic periodontitis

AIM

The purpose of this study was to assess the initiation and progression of periodontal disease during adult life.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

In a 26-year longitudinal investigation of the initiation and progression of chronic periodontitis that started in 1969 and included 565 men of Norwegian middle class, 223 who had participated in some, but not all, intermediate examinations presented at the last survey in 1995. Fifty-four individuals were available for examination in all seven surveys.

RESULTS

Covering the age range from 16 to 60 years, the study showed that at 16 years of age, 5% of the participants had initial loss of periodontal attachment (ILA > or = 2 mm) at one or more sites. Both the subject incidence and the site incidence increased with time, and by 32 years of age, all individuals had one or more sites with loss of attachment. As age progressed, new lesions affected sites, so that as these men approached 60 years of age approximately 50% of all available sites had ILA. An assessment of the intraoral distribution of the first periodontal lesion showed that, regardless of age, molars and bicuspids were most often affected. At and before the age of 40 years, the majority of ILA was found in buccal surfaces in the form of gingival recession. By 50 years, however, a greater proportion of sites presented with attachment loss attributed to pocket formation or a combination of pocket formation and gingival recession. As individuals neared 60 years of age, approximately half of the interproximal areas in posterior teeth had these lesions.

CONCLUSION

This investigation has shown that, in a well-maintained population who practises oral home care and has regular check-ups, the incidence of incipient periodontal destruction increases with age, the highest rate occurs between 50 and 60 years, and gingival recession is the predominant lesion before 40 years, while periodontal pocketing is the principal mode of destruction between 50 and 60 years of age.

Clinical course of chronic periodontitis

AIM

The purpose of this study was to assess the rate of attachment loss during various stages of adult life in a well-maintained middle-class population.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

The data originated from a 26-year longitudinal study of Norwegian males who had received regular and adequate dental care and practised daily oral home care. The initial examination in 1969 included 565 individuals aged between 16 and 34 years. Subsequent examinations took place in 1971, 1973, 1975, 1981, 1988 and 1995. Thus, the study covers the age range of 16-59 years. The rate of the annual attachment loss was calculated as the difference between the individual mean attachment loss between two examinations divided by the years between examinations. The mean annualized relative risk of attachment loss was calculated as the frequency distribution of sites with initial periodontal attachment loss (loss of attachment at the first time of occurrence > or = 2 mm) and healthy sites (loss of attachment always < 2 mm). For comparison of significant changes in annual attachment loss rates between the age groups and mean annualized relative risks of attachment loss as they proceeded through adult life, the Wilcoxon Mann-Whitney U-test was used.

RESULTS

The mean overall individual attachment loss during 44 years (between 16 and 59 years) totaled 2.44 mm (range 0.14-2.44 mm), averaging an annual mean rate of 0.05 mm/year. The highest annual rate of attachment loss occurred before 35 years of age (0.08-0.1 mm/year), after which the mean annual rate decreased to about 0.04-0.06 mm/year for the next three decades of life leading to 60 years. The mean annualized relative risk of initial attachment loss increased significantly from adolescence (1.2%) to the maximum at 30-34 years of age (6.9%). After the age of 34 years, the risk of initial attachment loss decreased again, but after the age of 40 years, another continuous increase was observed.

CONCLUSIONS

Over a 26-year period, 25% of the subjects went through adult life with healthy and stable periodontal conditions. The remaining 75% developed slight to moderately progressing periodontal disease with progression rates varying between 0.02 and 0.1 mm/year with a cumulative mean of loss of attachment of 2.44 mm as they approached 60 years of age. The annual mean rate and the mean annualized risk of initial attachment loss were highest between 16 and 34 years of age. Only 20% of the sites continued to lose further attachment during the remainder of the observation period, and less than 1% of the sites showed substantial loss of attachment (> 4 mm).

A systematic review of the effect of surgical debridement vs non-surgical debridement for the treatment of chronic periodontitis

OBJECTIVE

To systematically review the evidence of effectiveness of surgical vs. non-surgical therapy for the treatment of chronic periodontal disease.

METHODS

A search was conducted for randomized controlled trials of at least 12 months duration comparing surgical with non-surgical treatment of chronic periodontal disease. Data sources included the National Library of Medicine computerised bibliographic database MEDLINE, and the Cochrane Oral Health Group (COHG) Specialist Trials Register. Screening, data abstraction and quality assessment were conducted independently by multiple reviewers (L.H., F.H., L.T.). The primary outcome measures evaluated were gain in clinical attachment level (CAL) and reduction in probing pocket depth (PPD).

RESULTS

The search provided 589 abstracts of which six randomized controlled trials were included. Meta-analysis evaluation of these studies indicated that 12 months following treatment, surgical therapy resulted in 0.6 mm more PPD reduction (WMD 0.58 mm; 95% CI 0.38, 0.79) and 0.2 mm more CAL gain (WMD 0.19 mm; 95% CI 0.04, 0.35) than non-surgical therapy in deep pockets (>6 mm). In 4-6 mm pockets scaling and root planing resulted in 0.4 mm more attachment gain (WMD -0.37 mm; 95% CI -0.49, -0.26) and 0.4 mm less probing depth reduction (WMD 0.35 mm; 95% CI 0.23, 0.47) than surgical therapy. In shallow pockets (1-3 mm) non-surgical therapy resulted in 0.5 mm less attachment loss (WMD -0.51 mm; 95% CI -0.74, -0.29) than surgical therapy.

CONCLUSIONS

Both scaling and root planing alone and scaling and root planing combined with flap procedure are effective methods for the treatment of chronic periodontitis in terms of attachment level gain and reduction in gingival inflammation. In the treatment of deep pockets open flap debridement results in greater PPD reduction and clinical attachment gain.

A systematic review of graft materials and biological agents for periodontal intraosseous defects

OBJECTIVES

To determine the adjunctive effect of grafting biomaterials/biological agents with open flap debridement (OFD) in the treatment of deep intraosseous defects.

BACKGROUND

No systematic review of treatment outcomes in patients who received graft biomaterials or biological agents have been published.

METHODS

A rigorous systematic review of randomized controlled trials of at least 6-month duration was conducted comparing grafting biomaterials/biological agents (alone or in combination) + OFD (test group) to OFD alone or in combination with a placebo (control group).

RESULTS

The difference in CAL change between test and control groups varied from -1.45 mm to 1.40 mm with respect to different biomaterials/biological agents. Meta-analysis showed that CAL change significantly improved after treatment for coralline calcium carbonate (weighted mean difference 0.90 mm; 95% CI: 0.53-1.27), bioactive glass (weighted mean difference 1.04 mm; 95% CI: 0.31-1.76), hydroxyapatite (weighted mean difference 1.40 mm, 95% CI 0.64-2.16), and enamel matrix proteins (weighted mean difference 1.33 mm, 95% CI 0.78-1.88). However, heterogeneity in results between studies was highly statistically significant for most of biomaterials/biologicals and could not be fully explained.

CONCLUSIONS

Overall, the use of specific biomaterials/biologicals was more effective than OFD in improving attachment levels in intraosseous defects. Difference in CAL gain varied greatly with respect to different biomaterial/biological agent. Due to a significant heterogeneity in results between studies in most treatment groups, general conclusions about the expected clinical benefit of graft biomaterials/biologicals need to be interpreted with caution. Further research should focus on understanding this variability.

Long-term implant prognosis in patients with and without a history of chronic periodontitis: a 10-year prospective cohort study of the ITI Dental Implant System

AIM

The aim of this 10-year study was to compare the failure, success and complication rates between patients having lost their teeth due to periodontitis or other reasons.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Fifty-three patients who received 112 hollow screw implants (HS) of the ITI Dental Implant System were divided into two groups: group A - eight patients with 21 implants having lost their teeth due to chronic periodontitis; group B - forty five patients with 91 implants without a history of periodontitis. One and 10 years after surgical placement, clinical and radiographic parameters were assessed. The incidences of peri-implantitis were noticed over the 10 years of regular supportive periodontal therapy.

RESULTS

Success criteria at 10 years were set at: pocket probing depth (PPD) <or=5 mm, bleeding on probing (BoP-, bone loss <0.2 mm annually. The survival rate for the group with a past history of chronic periodontitis (group A) was 90.5%, while for the group with no past history of periodontitis (group B) it was 96.5%. Group A had a significantly higher incidence of peri-implantitis than group B (28.6% vs. 5.8%). With the success criteria set, 52.4% in group A and 79.1% of the implants in group B were successful. With a threshold set at PPD <or=6 mm, BoP- and bone loss <0.2 mm annually, the success rates were elevated to 62% and 81.3% for groups A and B, respectively. Relying purely on clinical parameters of PPD <or=5 mm and BoP-, the success rates were at 71.4% and 94.5%, and with a threshold set at PPD <or=6 mm and BoP-, these proportions were elevated to 81% and 96.7% for groups A and B, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients with implants replacing teeth lost due to chronic periodontitis demonstrated lower survival rates and more biological complications than patients with implants replacing teeth lost due to reasons other than periodontitis during a 10-year maintenance period. Furthermore, setting of thresholds for success criteria is crucial to the reporting of success rates.