Correlation between Peri-Implant Marginal Bone Loss Progression and Peri-Implant Sulcular Fluid Levels of Metalloproteinase-8.

Renzo Guarnieri,Luca Testarelli,Alessandro Mazzoni,Maurilio D’Angelo,Alessio Zanza,Rodolfo Reda,Dario Di Nardo,Andrea Del Giudice

doi:10.3390/jpm12010058

Abstract

Objectives: The aim of this retrospective study was to analyze peri-implant marginal bone loss levels/rates and peri-implant sulcular fluid levels/rates of metalloproteinase-8 in three timeframes (6 months post-surgery—restoration delivery (T0)—and 6 (T6) and 24 (T24)-months post-loading) and to evaluate if there is a correlation between peri-implant sulcular fluid levels of metalloproteinase-8 and peri-implant marginal bone loss progression. Materials and Methods: Two cohorts of patients undergoing implant surgery between January 2017 and January 2019 were selected in this retrospective study. A total of 39 patients received 39 implants with a laser-microtextured collar surface, and 41 subjects received 41 implants with a machined/smooth surface. For each patient, periapical radiographs and a software package were used to measure marginal bone loss rates. Implant fluid samples were analyzed by an enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) test. The modified plaque index, probing depth, and bleeding on probing were also recorded. Results: High marginal bone rates at T24 were strongly associated with elevated rates between T0 and T6. The levels of metalloproteinase-8 were significantly more elevated around implants with marginal bone loss, in relation to implants without marginal bone loss. Marginal bone loss (MBL) rates at 24 months were associated with initial bone loss rates and initial levels of metalloproteinase-8. Conclusions: Peri-implant marginal bone loss progression is statistically correlated to peri-implant sulcular fluid levels of metalloproteinase-8. Moreover, the initial high levels of marginal bone loss and metalloproteinase-8 can be considered as indicators of the subsequent progression of peri-implant MBL: implants with increased marginal bone loss rates and metalloproteinase-8 levels at 6 months after loading are likely to achieve additional marginal bone loss values.

Highlights

Peri-implant health or/and inflammatory conditions were defined at the 2017 WorldWorkshop on the Classification of Periodontal and Peri-implant Diseases and Conditions [1]as appearing in four forms: (1) peri-implant health, (2) peri-implant mucositis, (3) periimplantitis and (4) hard- and soft-tissue deficiencies
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations
None of the included implants were diagnosed with peri-implantitis (1–3), which prevents any extrapolation of findings to implants with a substantial disease

Summary

Introduction

Peri-implant health or/and inflammatory conditions were defined at the 2017 WorldWorkshop on the Classification of Periodontal and Peri-implant Diseases and Conditions [1]as appearing in four forms: (1) peri-implant health, (2) peri-implant mucositis, (3) periimplantitis and (4) hard- and soft-tissue deficiencies. Workshop on the Classification of Periodontal and Peri-implant Diseases and Conditions [1]. Some questions remain controversial; namely, in which condition among those described is an implant with marginal bone loss (MBL) to be considered, and what are the acceptable levels of MBL in order to establish a healthy or diseased peri-implant condition [2,3]. Does the need to define the etiology of MBL remain, and to distinguish between physiological and pathological peri-implant bone losses. To date, it still seems impossible to generalize a parameter or a measurement that allows one to define a physiological or pathological MBL without an evaluation of the specific characteristics of each single implant/patient, with each playing an important role in the prognosis [6,7]

Objectives

Results

Discussion

Conclusion