• 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.

• The Journal of the Korean dental association
• /
• v.57 no.12
• /
• pp.758-767
• /
• 2019

The classification of periodontal disease in 1999 has been widely used for determining a diagnosis, establishing a treatment plan, and evaluating the prognosis of the patient with periodontal disease. However, scientific evidence from many studies indicates the need for a new classification system for periodontal and peri-implant disease. Summary at 2017 world workshop as follows: 1) Periodontal health and peri-implant health was defined; 2) Chronic periodontitis and aggressive periodontitis were unified as periodontitis; 3) Periodontitis was further classified by staging and grading to reflect disease severity and management complexity, rate of disease progression, respectively; 4) Periodontal disease as manifestation of systemic disease is based on the International Statistical Classification of Diseases and Related Health Problems-10 (ICD-10) code; 5) Periodontal biotype and biologic width was replaced to periodontal phenotype and supracrestal tissue attachment, respectively; 6) The excessive occlusal force was replaced by a traumatic occlusal force; 7) ≥3 mm of radiographic bone loss, ≥6 mm of pocket probing depth and bleeding on probing indicates peri-implantitis in the absence of radiograph at final prosthesis delivery.

• Journal of Periodontal and Implant Science
• /
• v.46 no.3
• /
• pp.136-151
• /
• 2016

Peri-implant disease is a serious problem that plagues today's dentistry, both in terms of therapy and epidemiology. With the expansion of the practice of implantology and an increasing number of implants placed annually, the frequency of peri-implant disease has greatly expanded. Its clinical manifestations, in the absence of a globally established classification, are peri-implant mucositis and peri-implantitis, the counterparts of gingivitis and periodontitis, respectively. However, many doubts remain about its features. Official diagnostic criteria, globally recognized by the dental community, have not yet been introduced. The latest studies using metagenomic methods are casting doubt on the assumption of microbial equivalence between periodontal and peri-implant crevices. Research on most of the features of peri-implant disease remains at an early stage; moreover, there is not a commonly accepted treatment for it. In any case, although the evidence so far collected is limited, we need to be aware of the current state of the science regarding this topic to better understand and ultimately prevent this disease.

• 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.

• 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.

• The Journal of the Korean dental association
• /
• v.51 no.12
• /
• pp.630-636
• /
• 2013

During the past decade, the use of osseointegrated implants as a foundation for prosthetic replacement of missing teeth has become highly predictable and successful. SPT(Supportive Periodontal Therapy) identified as regular visits to the therapist for periodontal control and maintenance in a well-organized scheme, the number of appointments per year following a pre-designed subject-tooth/implant-site risk assessment method. Peri-implant disease was a frequent finding in subjects having natural healthy dentition and in subjects without periodontitis. Supportive periodontal program were found to be strongly related to implant survival. This study demonstrates that regular maintenance reduces the risk for peri-implant inflammation significantly as compared with irregular maintenance. This underlines the value of the SPT in enhancing the long-term outcomes of implant therapy, particularly in subjects affected by periodontitis, in order to control reinfection and limit biological complications. It is highly recommended to maintain implant patients under a strict supportive periodontal treatment protocol that might contribute to implant survival, and regular maintenance reduces the risk for periimplant inflammation significantly as compared with irregular maintenance. Ideally, patients may be informed on the beneficial effect of a regular patient-related post-therapy care before implant insertion.

• 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.

• 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.

• Journal of Periodontal and Implant Science
• /
• v.47 no.4
• /
• pp.240-250
• /
• 2017

Purpose: The aim of this study was to analyze the prevalence and risk indicators of peri-implantitis in Korean patients with history of periodontal disease. Methods: A total of 444 patients with 1,485 implants were selected from patients who had been treated at the Department of Periodontology, Chonbuk National University Dental Hospital between July 2014 and June 2015. A group with a history of peri-implantitis (HP) (370 patients with 1,189 implants) and a group with a current peri-implantitis (CP) (318 patients with 1,004 implants) were created based on the radiographic and clinical assessments of implants. The prevalence of peri-implantitis was calculated at both the patient and implant levels. The influence of risk variables on the occurrence of peri-implantitis was analyzed using generalized estimating equations analysis. Results: The prevalence of peri-implantitis in the HP and CP groups ranged from 6.7% to 19.7%. The cumulative peri-implantitis rate in the HP group estimated with the Kaplan-Meier method was higher than that in the CP group over the follow-up period. Among the patient-related risk variables, supportive periodontal therapy (SPT) was the only significant risk indicator for the occurrence of peri-implantitis in both groups. In the analysis of implant-related variables, implants supporting fixed dental prosthesis (FDP) and implants with subjective discomfort was associated with a higher prevalence of peri-implantitis than single implants and implants without subjective discomfort in the HP group. The presence of subjective discomfort was the only significant implant-related variable predictive of peri-implantitis in the CP group. Conclusions: Within the limitations of this study, the prevalence of peri-implantitis in Korean patients with a history of periodontal disease was similar to that reported in other population samples. Regular SPT was important for preventing peri-implantitis. Single implants were found to be less susceptible to peri-implantitis than those supporting FDP. Patients' subjective discomfort was found to be a strong risk indicator for peri-implantitis.

• The Journal of Advanced Prosthodontics
• /
• v.6 no.2
• /
• pp.146-149
• /
• 2014

The major drawback of cement-retained restorations is the extrusion of the excess cement into the peri-implant sulcus, with subsequent complications. Insufficient removal of the excess cement may initiate a local inflammatory process, which may lead to implant failure. This article presents a method of controlling cement flow on implant abutments, minimizing the excess cement around implant-retained restorations.