A prospective study of the clinical outcomes of peri‐implant tissues in patients treated for peri‐implant mucositis and followed up for 54 months

Abstract

Background Peri‐implant mucositis is very common and, when left untreated, can progress to the more serious condition of peri‐implantitis. Therefore, early diagnosis, adequate treatment and, in particular, adherence to a peri‐implant supportive therapy are extremely important for the management of peri‐implant mucositis. Purpose Characterize the clinical conditions of peri‐implant tissues in patients diagnosed with peri‐implant mucositis after undergoing peri‐implant supportive therapy for 54 months. Materials and Methods Thirty‐eight patients (131 dental implants) who received peri‐implant supportive therapy, associated with oral hygiene instructions, were assessed at baseline and at 54 months for visible plaque and gingival bleeding indexes, probing depth and bleeding on probing. Data were statistically analyzed using the Chi‐square test and relative risk assessment using a significance level set at 5%. Results None of the independent variables evaluated (age, gender, smoking, type of prosthesis, time using the prosthesis, keratinized mucosa, phenotype peri‐implant, classification of visible plaque index and classification of gingival bleeding index) presented significant associations with “worsening” or “improvement” of clinical parameters. Conclusion The implementation of peri‐implant support therapy was not sufficient for the resolution of peri‐implant mucositis, although reductions in clinical parameters with respect to baseline were observed and maintained during follow‐up.

The role of keratinized mucosa width as a risk factor for peri‐implant disease: A systematic review, meta‐analysis, and trial sequential analysis

“…Perussolo et al were considered, respectively, at moderate and high risk of bias, 21,30 respectively. Finally, half of the prospective cohort studies demonstrated low risk of bias, 4,29 while two studies 25,28 demonstrated high risk of bias.…”

“…Five of the studies were prospective cohort studies, 4,21,25,28,29 three were non-RCTs, 26,27,30 and one was an RCT. 20 Seven studies were carried out solely in academic settings, 20,21,[26][27][28][29][30] while the remaining two were conducted in both academic and private practice settings. 4,25 All but one of the studies 4 were single-centered clinical trials.…”

“…Finally, nine studies fulfilled the eligibility criteria and were selected for data extraction. 4,20,21,[25][26][27][28][29][30] The reasons due to 17 articles were excluded, as summarized in Figure 1 and Table S2. Kappa scores for inter-examiner agreement for title and abstract review as well as full-text review were 0.85 and 0.87, respectively.…”

“…21,25,27,30 One study did not report the location of implant placement. 28 Three studies included partially edentulous arches only, 27,28,30 four included completely edentulous arches exclusively, 4,20,26,29 and one study involved the treatment of both partially and completely edentulous arches. 25…”

“…The follow-up period ranged between 1 and 5 years (Table 1). One study reported a 1-year follow-up period, 26 one study reported a 2-year follow-up period, 25 two studies reported a 4-year followup, 27,30 one study reported a 4.5-year follow-up period, 28 and four studies reported a 5-year follow-up period. 4,20,21,29…”