Periodontal conditions of teeth adjacent to dental implants with or without peri‐implantitis after non‐surgical therapy in patients treated for periodontitis: A retrospective study

Abstract

AbstractObjectivesTo retrospectively assess the periodontal conditions of teeth adjacent to and contralateral to implants presenting with or without peri‐implantitis, following non‐surgical periodontal and peri‐implant mechanical therapy.Materials and MethodsOne hundred and one patients with existing dental implants and chronic periodontitis, who underwent non‐surgical periodontal and peri‐implant mechanical therapy, were included. The periodontal clinical probing depth (PPD), gingival recession (GR), and bleeding on probing (BOP) were recorded at six sites around the adjacent (Adj‐) teeth and the contralateral (CL‐) teeth relative to the implant. The potential factors influencing the periodontal conditions of 316 teeth were analyzed by multivariate linear regression models with generalized estimating equation methods and α = .05.ResultsThe PPD of Adj‐teeth was significantly different from that of CL‐teeth before and after non‐surgical therapy when the implant was diagnosed with peri‐implantitis (PI) (p < .05). The PPD of teeth was shown to be affected by neighboring implants diagnosed with peri‐implantitis (β = .825 mm, p < .001), teeth adjacent to implants (β = .245 mm, p = .004), a molar tooth type (β = .435 mm, p = .019), and non‐surgical therapy (β = −.522 mm, p < .001).ConclusionsRelatively compromised periodontal conditions at Adj‐teeth after non‐surgical PI therapy were detected. Therefore, clinicians should be aware that non‐surgical therapy may be less successful at teeth adjacent to implants with PI.