Prevalence Of Peri-implant Disease Research Articles

Maxillary Full Arch Restorations – Biological Complications: A Narrative Review Outlining Criteria for Long Term Success

Patients receiving full arch implant borne maxillary prostheses require functional, esthetic, and long term success. The importance of this review is to document the difficulty with implant maintenance, the prevalence of peri-implant disease, and the improvement in biologic health when using a prosthesis that can be maintained to minimize plaque. The objective is to provide surgeons with a reference to optimize surgical procedures that can result in improved hygiene and long term maintenance, as well as acceptable functional and esthetic goals. Pubmed.gov was the information source. Years reviewed included 1990-2022. Inclusion criteria included only articles in journals referenced in pubmed.gov. The reports excluded were case reports, reports that only included implant survival, and articles without a statistical analysis to generate meaningful conclusions. Biological complications included bone loss, hygiene difficulty, mucositis and recession, the incidence of peri-implantitis, and how complications related to patient co-morbidities. Data collected included outcomes of the study including statistical significance. The search identified articles for review using terms which included full arch maxillary restorations (n=736), long term success with full arch maxillary prostheses (n=22), ceramic full arch restorations (n=102), and complications with full arch restorations (n=231). From this search, 53 articles were collated that satisfied the inclusion criteria. Factors found to be significant contributors to biological complications included bone loss and peri-implant disease, difficulty with daily hygiene access, plaque and biofilm coverage, and the need for continued maintenance for long term implant health. The surgeon needs to place implants to allow a full arch maxillary prosthesis to be fabricated with full access to the implants for maintenance, which should decrease the incidence of biological complications. With excellent maintenance full arch implant restorations can have limited peri-implant disease.

The Stages and Grades of Periodontitis Are Risk Indicators for Peri-Implant Diseases-A Long-Term Retrospective Study.

The aim of this study is to evaluate the factors of implant failure in patients with periodontitis and their impact on the prognosis of having a peri-implant disease and/or implant failure. Data regarding 325 implants among 84 patients with periodontitis were retrospectively examined. Patients were classified by Stage (I, II, III, IV) and Grade (A, B, C), implant failures for peri-implant disease and lack of osseointegration. Clinical data, including implant- and patient-related variables were evaluated by principal components analysis (PCA) and two-step cluster analysis (CA). Survival and success rates were 96.3% and 87.1%, respectively. Prevalence of peri-implant disease was significantly higher in Stage IV patients (p < 0.05), and incidence of lost implant due to peri-implantitis was significantly higher in patients with bone augmentation (BA) (p < 0.05). PCA and CA revealed five of eleven variables and four clusters at patient level, and six of fourteen variables and three clusters at implant level. Stage and Grade are useful indicators for the development of peri-implant diseases in which BA and the number of implants are involved.

Prevalence of peri-implant disease and factors affecting peri-implant disease at our clinic

Prevalence of peri-implant disease and factors affecting peri-implant disease at our clinic

Epstein-Barr Virus and Peri-Implantitis: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

The exponential growth in the use of dental implants in the last decades has been accompanied by an increase in the prevalence of peri-implant disease. It appears that viruses may have pathogenic potential for the development of this pathology. The objective of this systematic review is to study the possible association between the presence of Epstein–Barr virus and the development of peri-implantitis. An electronic search was conducted in PubMed/MEDLINE, Scielo and Embase databases for cross-sectional and case–control studies in humans published up to and including 4 January 2021. Five studies were included in the qualitative analysis. The meta-analysis did not show a statistically significant difference regarding the prevalence of Epstein–Barr virus in the peri-implant sulcus between implants with peri-implantitis and healthy implants. In conclusion, no association between the human herpesvirus 4 and peri-implantitis was found. Further research on this topic is essential to develop more effective treatments.

The prevalence of peri-implant disease following immediate implant placement and loading: a cross-sectional analysis after 2 to 10 years

BackgroundTo evaluate the prevalence of peri-implant disease after immediate implant placement and loading.Material and methodsThis cross-sectional analysis included a total of 47 patients with 64 implants exhibiting a mean loading time of 2 to 10 years (4.23 ± 1.7 years). The surgical and prosthetic procedures were standardized in all patients. Peri-implant health and disease was assessed based on the established case definitions.ResultsThe prevalence of peri-implant health, peri-implant mucositis, and peri-implantitis amounted to 38.3%, 57.5%, and 4.2% of the patients, respectively. Mucosal recession of 1 mm was present at 4 (6%) implants. No suppuration, pain, or implant failures were reported. Ordinal logistic regression revealed that reduced keratinized mucosa height was significantly associated with the diagnosis of peri-implant mucositis and peri-implantitis (OR = 0.514, P = 0.0125).ConclusionImmediate implant placement and loading was associated with high success rates at 2 to 10 years.

Effect of vertical soft tissue thickness on clinical manifestation of peri-implant tissue in patients with periodontitis

To observe and investigate the effect of vertical soft tissue thickness on the peri-implant tissue condition and the prevalence of peri-implant disease in patients with history of periodontitis. Among 210 patients who showed initial interest of implant therapy, 92 patients were included in this study and received implant surgery during 2010 and 2015. Sixty-six patients with 66 implants finally came back for T2 evaluation. Prior to the implant therapy, all the patients had received periodontal treatment. During the implant placement surgery, the distance from palatal soft tissue edge to the alveolar crest, which was defined as vertical soft tissue thickness (VT), was measured after the buccal full thickness flap was elevated. According to the cut off point which was adopted from the operating characteristic curve, 66 implants within 66 patients were divided into two groups, which were called normal group (VT≤4.5 mm) and thick group (VT>4.5 mm), respectively. Information of the patient's general status, periodontal situation and implant information were recorded. After a follow-up period of 42.9 months, the parameters of peri-implant tissue and condition of peri-implant disease were recorded. Mann-Whitney U test as well as Chi-square test were used to compare the parameters between two groups. Moreover, Kaplan-Meier method was chosen to draw the event(peri-implantitis)-free survival curve. The survival rate of the implants was 100%. At the end of the follow-up examination(T2), the parameters including max PDi, mean PDi, max BIi, mean BIi, mean MBL, MBL at distal side, MBL at mesial side, mean PLIi presented significantly higher values in thick group than in normal group (P < 0.05). Moreover, the prevalence of peri-implantitis and peri-implant disease (peri-implant mucositis & peri-implantitis) in thick group was respectively 34.8% and 73.9%, which was significantly higher than 2.3% and 48.8% respectively in normal group (P<0.05). The prevalence of peri-implant mucositis did not show significant difference in the two groups. In addition, Kaplan-Meier analysis showed that there was significant difference between the event-free survivals of the two groups. The vertical soft tissue thickness around implants in patients with periodontitis has a significant effect on the health of the peri-implant tissue. Excessive vertical soft tissue thickness may result in deeper peri-implant probing depth as well as more peri-implant marginal bone loss, and eventually increase the risk of peri-implant disease. The vertical remodeling of soft tissue may be a new direction to indicate the role of periodontitis in peri-implant tissue condition. Moreover, the biological mechanism of the association between soft tissue thickness and peri-implantitis risk as well as effective approaches to prevent the adverse effect of excessive soft tissue thickness on peri-implant tissue is necessary to be investigated.

Prevalence of peri-implant disease and risk indicators with at least 4 years in function

Prevalence of peri-implant disease and risk indicators with at least 4 years in function

Prevalence of Peri-implant Disease According to Periodontal Probing Depth and Bleeding on Probing: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

To compare changes in the prevalence of peri-implantitis when the unit of analysis is the subject and when the unit of analysis is the implant, by means of meta-analysis with subgroup and sensitivity analyses, according to the case definition and cutoffs. Periodontal probing depth (PPD) and bleeding on probing (BOP) were considered the primary variables. Electronic and manual searches of observational studies of implants with loading of more than 6 months were conducted. The quality of the studies was evaluated, and finally, a description (qualitative analysis) and a meta-analysis (quantitative analysis) of the available studies were performed. Fifty-five studies were included in this systematic review, 32 of which met the criteria for evaluation of disease based on PPD and BOP. A total of 2,734 subjects and 7,849 implants were evaluated. The prevalence of peri-implantitis, defined by PPD and BOP, was 17% when the unit of analysis was the subject, and 11% when it was the implant. If the clinical criterion was PPD ≥ 4 mm, the prevalence by subject was 34% and by implant 11%. If PPD was ≥ 5 mm, the prevalence by subject was 12% and by implant 10%. Finally, if the clinical criterion was PPD ≥ 6 mm, the prevalence by subject was 18% and by implant 10%. The prevalence of peri-implantitis is influenced by the criteria used for the case definition, and the true prevalence may currently be incorrectly estimated.

PR702: Prevalence of periimplant disease in a cohort of periodontal patients without supportive periodontal therapy in a private office

PR702: Prevalence of periimplant disease in a cohort of periodontal patients without supportive periodontal therapy in a private office

Prevalence of peri-implant disease on platform switching implants: a cross-sectional pilot study.

The objective of this study was to assess the prevalence of mucositis and peri-implantitis associated with the use of two types of implants-conventional versus platform switching after one year of loading. A longitudinal study of 64 implants in 25 patients was performed. Clinical variables, such as clinical pocket depth and bleeding upon probing, plaque, mobility, gingival recession, clinical attachment loss, and radiographic bone loss, were analyzed. The case definition for peri-implantitis was established as pockets of ≥ 5 mm with bleeding and bone loss ≥ 2 mm. One year after implant loading, the prevalence of mucositis and peri-implantitis with conventional implants (CIs) was 81.2% and 15.6%, respectively. For platform switching implants (PSIs) the prevalence was 90% and 6.6%, respectively. These differences were not statistically significant (p = 0.5375). However, there was a trend towards a lower prevalence of peri-implantitis with platform switching Implants.

Peri-implant diseases: an overview

The use of dental implants in replacing missing teeth is proven to be a valid treatment with a high success rate. To achieve the best treatment outcome in all implant systems, the implant has to be able to integrate with the surrounding tissue. However, dental implants are affected by peri-implant diseases and may fail as a result. As the number of implants placed continues to increase, the prevalence of peri-implant disease will also increase. This requires preventive measures to inhibit the development of the disease and stop its progression. Clinical Relevance: Understanding how to maintain healthy peri-implant tissue as well as diagnosis and treatment of disease are vital for every dentist and dental student.

Retrospective long-term evaluation of dental implants in totally and partially edentulous patients: part II: periimplant disease.

This retrospective longitudinal study aims to assess long-term outcomes of osseointegrated dental implants placed in partially and totally edentulous patients. Patients who were willing to sign the informed consent and attend a check-up were included. The prevalence of periimplant disease was calculated. Cases were further divided into mucositis or periimplantitis. Uni- and multi-variate statistical analyses were conducted to determine the influence of various factors. A total of 105 patients who had received 342 implants were included. Mean follow-up was 13.19 ± 3.70 years. The prevalence of periimplant disease was 14.2% of the analyzed implants and 21% of patients. An additional 4.8% of patients reported a previous presence of periimplant disease without current disease. The prevalence of mucositis and periimplantitis was 11.2% and 1.7%, respectively, of analyzed implants. Factors with possible influence on the presence of periimplant disease were gender, alcohol consumption, chemotherapy and/or head and neck radiotherapy, history of periodontal disease, and years of function. In our sample, periimplant disease was not infrequent, being present in 1 of 5 patients at the final check-up.

Prevalence of periimplant disease in partially edentulous patients: a practice-based cross-sectional study

Evaluation of the prevalence rates of periimplant mucositis and periimplantitis in partially edentulous patients in a private dental practice. The data of 89 patients were collected (52 female, 37 male, age at time of implant placement: 51.8 ± 10.3 years). All patients had been treated with dental implants of the same type and fixed superstructures between January 1999 and June 2006 (observational period: 68.2 ± 24.8 months). The patient-related prevalence rate of periimplant mucositis (probing depth ≥ 4 mm and bleeding on probing [BOP]) was over all 44.9%. The respective rates in non-smokers without periodontal history were 30.4% and in smokers with periodontal history 80%. The multiple logistic regression analysis identified a significant association of mucositis with the independent variable "smoker" (odds ratio [OR] 3.77; P = 0.023). The patient-related prevalence rate of periimplantitis (probing depth ≥ 5 mm, BOP/pus, radiographic bone loss) was 11.2% (smokers with periodontal history: 53.3%, non-smokers: 2.8%). No periimplant disease was diagnosed in non-smoking patients without periodontal history and with a good compliance after treatment. Statistical analysis identified a significant association of periimplantitis with "smoker" (OR: 31.58; P<0.001) and "compliance" (OR: 0.09; P = 0.011). Periodontal history in general showed no significant association with periimplantitis. Smoking and compliance are important risk factors for periimplant inflammations in partially edentulous patients.

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.