Peri-implant soft tissue status and crestal bone levels around adjacent implants placed in cigarette smokers and never smokers: Five-year follow-up results.

Abstract

It is hypothesized that peri-implant soft tissue inflammation and crestal bone loss (CBL) are higher around adjacent implants placed in cigarette smokers compared with never smokers. The aim of the present 5-years follow-up retrospective clinical study was to compare the peri-implant soft tissue status and CBL around adjacent implants placed in cigarette smokers and never smokers. Cigarette smokers (group 1) and never smokers (group 2) with adjacent dental implants were included. Demographic information regarding age, sex, duration of smoking (pack-years), daily frequency of toothbrushing and most recent visit to a dentist or dental hygienist were recorded using a questionnaire. Information regarding implant dimensions (length × diameter), duration of implants in function, loading protocol (and type of restoration was recorded. Peri-implant plaque index (PI), bleeding on probing (BOP), probing depth (PD), and mesial and distal CBL were measured. P<0.05 were considered statistically significant. Seventy-two male participants (37 in group 1 and 35 in group 2) were included. The mean age of individuals in groups 1 and 2 were 50.3 ± 5.4 and 48.5 ± 3.8 years, respectively. In group 1, the mean duration of cigarette smoking was 22.3 ± 1.6 pack years. A family history of smoking was more often reported by individuals in group 1 compared with group 2. In groups 1 and 2, 54 and 70 adjacent implants, respectively were placed in the regions of missing premolars and molars. All implants were delayed loaded and were fixed with non-splinted screw-retained restorations. In groups 1 and 2, toothbrushing twice daily was reported by 78.3% and 74.2% individuals, respectively. There was no statistically significant difference in peri-implant PI, BOP, PD, and mesial and distal CBL among individuals in groups 1 and 2. Peri-implant soft tissue status and crestal bone levels were comparable around adjacent dental implants placed in cigarette smokers and never smokers.