• Title/Summary/Keyword: Peri-implant

Search Result 305, Processing Time 0.027 seconds

Diagnosis and treatment of Peri-implantitis (Peri-implantitis의 진단 및 치료)

  • Koo, Ki-Tae
    • The Journal of the Korean dental association
    • /
    • v.54 no.4
    • /
    • pp.252-257
    • /
    • 2016
  • This manuscript aims at discussing the technical and biological aspects of peri-implant disease. The following contents will be discussed. -The difference between peri-implantitis and peri-implant mucositis. -Prevalence of peri-implant disease. -Risk factors for peri-implantitis. -Indications and boundaries of non-surgical and surgical treatment -Treatment flow-chart by Schwarz -Limitations of non-surgical treatment -Methods to decontaminate diseased surfaces -Importance of defect configuration in surgical treatment -Biomechanical factors that influence the progression and decontamination related to peri-implantitis -Maintenance of implants.

  • PDF

The effective diagnosis of peri-implant diseases (임상가를 위한 특집 3 - 임플란트 주위질환의 효과적 진단)

  • Kim, Yong-Gun;Lee, Jae-Mok
    • The Journal of the Korean dental association
    • /
    • v.52 no.7
    • /
    • pp.408-415
    • /
    • 2014
  • Peri-implant diseases are inflammatory lesions, which include peri-implant mucositis and peri-implantitis. Peri-implant mucositis is described as the presence of inflammation in the mucosa around implants without any bone loss. By contrast, in peri-implantitis, besides the inflammation in the peri-implant mucosa, loss of supporting bone is also seen. Diagnosis of peri-implant diseases require the use of gentle probing(0.2 ~ 0.3N) to identify the presence of bleeding on probing, probing depth and suppuration, both signs of clinical inflammation. Radiographs are required to detect loss of supporting bone. Baseline probing measurements and high quality, long cone periapical radiographs should be obtained once the restoration of the implant is completed to make possible longitudinal monitoring of peri-implant tissue.

Retrospective analysis of keratinized tissue augmentation using a xenogeneic collagen matrix for resolving peri-implant mucositis and peri-implantitis

  • Jung Soo Park;Yeek Herr;Jong-Hyuk Chung;Seung-Il Shin;Hyun-Chang Lim
    • Journal of Periodontal and Implant Science
    • /
    • v.53 no.2
    • /
    • pp.145-156
    • /
    • 2023
  • Purpose: The significance of keratinized tissue for peri-implant health has been emphasized. However, there is an absence of clinical evidence for the use of a xenogeneic collagen matrix (XCM) to manage peri-implant mucositis and peri-implantitis. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to investigate outcomes after keratinized tissue augmentation using an XCM for the management of peri-implant diseases. Methods: Twelve implants (5 with peri-implant mucositis and 7 with peri-implantitis) in 10 patients were included in this study. Non-surgical treatments were first performed, but inflammation persisted in all implant sites. The implant sites all showed a lack of keratinized mucosa (KM) and vestibular depth (VD). Apically positioned flaps with XCM application were performed. Bone augmentation was simultaneously performed on peri-implantitis sites with an intrabony defect (>3 mm). The following clinical parameters were measured: the probing pocket depth (PPD), modified sulcular bleeding index (mSBI), suppuration (SUP), keratinized mucosal height (KMH), and VD. Results: There were no adverse healing events during the follow-up visits (18±4.6 months). The final KMHs and VDs were 4.34±0.86 mm and 8.0±4.05 mm, respectively, for the sites with peri-implant mucositis and 3.29±0.86 mm and 6.5±1.91 mm, respectively, for the sites with peri-implantitis. Additionally, the PPD and mSBI significantly decreased, and none of the implants presented with SUP. Conclusions: Keratinized tissue augmentation using an XCM for sites with peri-implant mucositis and peri-implantitis was effective for increasing the KMH and VD and decreasing peri-implant inflammation.

Nonsurgical interventions for treating peri-implantitis and prognosis (임상가를 위한 특집 1 - 임플란트 주위염의 비외과적 치료 방법과 예후)

  • Park, Se-Hwan;Lee, Jae-Kwan
    • The Journal of the Korean dental association
    • /
    • v.52 no.7
    • /
    • pp.396-401
    • /
    • 2014
  • Peri-implantitis is an inflammatory disease of the peri-implant tissue by bacterial infection or other factors, which results in peri-implant bone loss. Many nonsurgical treatments were tried on initial to moderate peri-implantitis lesion to reduce the inflammation. Some of these treatments made effective results, however, they were not definitively predictable. To prevent peri-implantitis and further peri-implant bone loss, early intervention is the most important. Early detection of peri-implant infection through the regular maintenance care can make it possible to do early nonsurgical intervention. Nonsurgical intervention is effective on peri-implant mucositis and can also be effective on initial peri-implantitis lesion. If the peri-implantitis is not resolves by nonsurgical treatment, surgical approach should be considered.

Prevalence and risk factors of peri-implant mucositis and peri-implantitis after at least 7 years of loading

  • Ahn, Dae-Hee;Kim, Hyun-Joo;Joo, Ji-Young;Lee, Ju-Youn
    • Journal of Periodontal and Implant Science
    • /
    • v.49 no.6
    • /
    • pp.397-405
    • /
    • 2019
  • Purpose: This study examined the prevalence and risk factors of peri-implant disease after at least 7 years of dental implant loading. Methods: A total of 111 patients with 218 dental implants were treated. The follow-up period for all implants was at least 7 years. The patients' dental records were collected and risk factors of peri-implant disease were investigated through logistic regression analysis. Results: The overall implant survival rate was 95.87%, because 9 of the 218 implants failed. The prevalence of peri-implant mucositis and peri-implantitis was 39.7% and 16.7%, respectively. As risk factors, smoking and prosthetic splinting showed significant associations with peri-implantitis (P<0.05). Conclusions: Within the limits of this study, no significant correlations were found between any risk factors and peri-implant mucositis, but a significantly elevated risk of peri-implantitis was observed in patients who smoked or had splinted prostheses in 2 or more implants.

Influence of soft tissue and bone thickness on the dimensional change of peri-implant soft tissues;A clinical follow-up study (연조직 및 골 두께가 임플란트 주위 연조직 형태에 끼치는 영향에 관한 임상추적연구)

  • Chang, Moon-Taek
    • Journal of Periodontal and Implant Science
    • /
    • v.35 no.1
    • /
    • pp.187-197
    • /
    • 2005
  • The aim of this study was to investigate the influence of peri-implant soft tissue and bone thickness on the early dimensional change of peri-implant soft tissue. Seventy-seven non-submerged implants of 39 patients which had been loaded more than 6 months were selected for the study. Following clinical parameters were measured; bucco-lingual bone width of the alveolar bone for implant placement before implant surgery; distance between implant shoulder and the first bone/implant contact at the surgery; presence of plaque, probing depth, bleeding on probing, width of keratinized mucosa, mucosa thickness, distance between implant shoulder and peri-implant mucosa, crown margin location at follow-up examination. The results showed that distance between implant shoulder and peri-implant mucosa (DIM) was correlated with probing depth and width of keratinized mucosa (p < 0.05). In addition, mucosa thickness was also correlated with probing depth (p<0.05). However, the bone width of alveolar bone and soft tissue thickness were not found to be correlated with DIM. It is important to understand the meaning of peri-implant tissue dimension in relation to dimensional changes of peri-implant soft tissue which designates appearance of implant-supported restorations. Future study is needed to elucidate the significance of the buccal bone thickness and soft tissue thickness with respect to the change of peri-implant soft tissue margin with the use of an instrument capable of measuring buccal bone thickness directly.

Risk indicators related to periimplant disease: an observational retrospective cohort study

  • Poli, Pier Paolo;Beretta, Mario;Grossi, Giovanni Battista;Maiorana, Carlo
    • Journal of Periodontal and Implant Science
    • /
    • v.46 no.4
    • /
    • pp.266-276
    • /
    • 2016
  • Purpose: The aim of the present study was to retrospectively investigate the influence of potential risk indicators on the development of peri-implant disease. Methods: Overall, 103 patients referred for implant treatment from 2000 to 2012 were randomly enrolled. The study sample consisted of 421 conventional-length (>6 mm) non-turned titanium implants that were evaluated clinically and radiographically according to preestablished clinical and patient-related parameters by a single investigator. A non-parametric Mann-Whitney U test or Kruskal-Wallis rank test and a logistic regression model were used for the statistical analysis of the recorded data at the implant level. Results: The diagnosis of peri-implant mucositis and peri-implantitis was made for 173 (41.1%) and 19 (4.5%) implants, respectively. Age (${\geq}65$ years), patient adherence (professional hygiene recalls <2/year) and the presence of plaque were associated with higher peri-implant probing-depth values and bleeding-on-probing scores. The logistic regression analysis indicated that age (P=0.001), patient adherence (P=0.03), the absence of keratinized tissue (P=0.03), implants placed in pristine bone (P=0.04), and the presence of peri-implant soft-tissue recession (P=0.000) were strongly associated with the event of peri-implantitis. Conclusions: Within the limitations of this study, patients aged ${\geq}65$ years and non-adherent subjects were more prone to develop peri-implant disease. Therefore, early diagnosis and a systematic maintenance-care program are essential for maintaining peri-implant tissue health, especially in older patients.

Advanced peri-implantitis cases with radical surgical treatment

  • McCrea, Shane J.J.
    • Journal of Periodontal and Implant Science
    • /
    • v.44 no.1
    • /
    • pp.39-47
    • /
    • 2014
  • Purpose: Peri-implantitis, a clinical term describing the inflammatory process that affects the soft and hard tissues around an osseointegrated implant, may lead to peri-implant pocket formation and loss of supporting bone. However, this imprecise definition has resulted in a wide variation of the reported prevalence; ${\geq}10%$ of implants and 20% of patients over a 5- to 10-year period after implantation has been reported. The individual reporting of bone loss, bleeding on probing, pocket probing depth and inconsistent recording of results has led to this variation in the prevalence. Thus, a specific definition of peri-implantitis is needed. This paper describes the vast variation existing in the definition of peri-implantitis and suggests a logical way to record the degree and prevalence of the condition. The evaluation of bone loss must be made within the concept of natural physiological bony remodelling according to the initial peri-implant hard and soft tissue damage and actual definitive load of the implant. Therefore, the reason for bone loss must be determined as either a result of the individual osseous remodelling process or a response to infection. Methods: The most current Papers and Consensus of Opinion describing peri-implantitis are presented to illustrate the dilemma that periodontologists and implant surgeons are faced with when diagnosing the degree of the disease process and the necessary treatment regime that will be required. Results: The treatment of peri-implantitis should be determined by its severity. A case of advanced peri-implantitis is at risk of extreme implant exposure that results in a loss of soft tissue morphology and keratinized gingival tissue. Conclusions: Loss of bone at the implant surface may lead to loss of bone at any adjacent natural teeth or implants. Thus, if early detection of peri-implantitis has not occurred and the disease process progresses to advanced peri-implantitis, the compromised hard and soft tissues will require extensive, skill-sensitive regenerative procedures, including implantotomy, established periodontal regenerative techniques and alternative osteotomy sites.

Risk indicators for mucositis and peri-implantitis: results from a practice-based cross-sectional study

  • Rinke, Sven;Nordlohne, Marc;Leha, Andreas;Renvert, Stefan;Schmalz, Gerhard;Ziebolz, Dirk
    • Journal of Periodontal and Implant Science
    • /
    • v.50 no.3
    • /
    • pp.183-196
    • /
    • 2020
  • Purpose: This practice-based cross-sectional study aimed to investigate whether common risk indicators for peri-implant diseases were associated with peri-implant mucositis and peri-implantitis in patients undergoing supportive implant therapy (SIT) at least 5 years after implant restoration. Methods: Patients exclusively restored with a single implant type were included. Probing pocket depth (PPD), bleeding on probing (BOP), suppuration, and radiographic bone loss (RBL) were assessed around implants. The case definitions were as follows: peri-implant mucositis: PPD ≥4 mm, BOP, no RBL; and peri-implantitis: PPD ≥5 mm, BOP, RBL ≥3.5 mm. Possible risk indicators were compared between patients with and without mucositis and peri-implantitis using the Fisher exact test and the Wilcoxon rank-sum test, as well as a multiple logistic regression model for variables showing significance (P<0.05). Results: Eighty-four patients with 169 implants (observational period: 5.8±0.86 years) were included. A patient-based prevalence of 52% for peri-implant mucositis and 18% for peri-implantitis was detected. The presence of 3 or more implants (odds ratio [OR], 4.43; 95 confidence interval [CI], 1.36-15.05; P=0.0136) was significantly associated with an increased risk for mucositis. Smoking was significantly associated with an increased risk for peri-implantitis (OR, 5.89; 95% CI, 1.27-24.58; P=0.0231), while the presence of keratinized mucosa around implants was associated with a lower risk for peri-implantitis (OR, 0.05; 95% CI, 0.01-0.25; P<0.001). Conclusions: The number of implants should be considered in strategies to prevent mucositis. Furthermore, smoking and the absence of keratinized mucosa were the strongest risk indicators for peri-implantitis in patients undergoing SIT in the present study.

The influence of bone graft procedures on primary stability and bone change of implants placed in fresh extraction sockets

  • Jun, Sang Ho;Park, Chang-Joo;Hwang, Suk-Hyun;Lee, Youn Ki;Zhou, Cong;Jang, Hyon-Seok;Ryu, Jae-Jun
    • Maxillofacial Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery
    • /
    • v.40
    • /
    • pp.8.1-8.6
    • /
    • 2018
  • Background: This study was to evaluate the effect of bone graft procedure on the primary stability of implants installed in fresh sockets and assess the vertical alteration of peri-implant bone radiographically. Methods: Twenty-three implants were inserted in 18 patients immediately after tooth extraction. The horizontal gap between the implant and bony walls of the extraction socket was grafted with xenografts. The implant stability before and after graft procedure was measured by Osstell Mentor as implant stability quotient before bone graft (ISQ bbg) and implant stability quotient after bone graft (ISQ abg). Peri-apical radiographs were taken to measure peri-implant bone change immediately after implant surgery and 12 months after implant placement. Data were analyzed by independent t test; the relationships between stability parameters (insertion torque value (ITV), ISQ abg, and ISQ bbg) and peri-implant bone changes were analyzed according to Pearson correlation coefficients. Results: The increase of ISQ in low primary stability group (LPSG) was 6.87 ± 3.62, which was significantly higher than the increase in high primary stability group (HPSG). A significant correlation between ITV and ISQ bbg (R = 0.606, P = 0.002) was found; however, age and peri-implant bone change were not found significantly related to implant stability parameters. It was presented that there were no significant peri-implant bone changes at 1 year after bone graft surgery. Conclusions: Bone graft procedure is beneficial for increasing the primary stability of immediately placed implants, especially when the ISQ of implants is below 65 and that bone grafts have some effects on peri-implant bone maintenance.