Classification and Clinical Management of Retrograde Peri-implantitis Associated with Apical Periodontitis: A Proposed Classification System and Case Report
“…From Sarmast et al (2017) case report titled ‘Classification and Clinical Management of Retrograde Peri‐implantitis Associated with Apical Periodontitis: A Proposed Classification System and Case Report’, the keywords used were ‘Bone regeneration, dental pulp necrosis, periapical diseases, peri‐implantitis’.…”
Section: The Price 2020 Explanation and Elaboration Documentmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…From Sarmast et al (2017) – ‘His medical history was contributory for seizures in the past; however, this was well controlled, and his last episode was more than 10 years ago. He is currently taking levetiracetam, dexlansoprazole, and clonazepam medications without complaint’.…”
Section: The Price 2020 Explanation and Elaboration Documentmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…From Sarmast et al (2017) – ‘His dental history included multiple endodontically treated teeth and fractured restorations. He presented with multiple nonrestorable teeth and missing dentition’.…”
Section: The Price 2020 Explanation and Elaboration Documentmentioning
Case reports play a key role in showcasing new, unusual or rare disease(s), and the impact of newer therapeutic approaches or interventions. The Preferred Reporting Items for Case reports in Endodontics (PRICE) 2020 guidelines are being introduced exclusively for Endodontics by adapting and integrating the CAse REport (CARE) guidelines and Clinical and Laboratory Images in Publications principles. The PRICE 2020 guidelines have been developed to help authors improve the completeness, accuracy and transparency of case reports in Endodontics and thus enhance the standard of manuscripts submitted for publication. The aim of this document is to provide a comprehensive explanation for each item in the PRICE 2020 checklist along with examples from the literature that demonstrate compliance with these guidelines. This information will highlight the importance of each item and provide practical examples to help authors understand the necessity of providing comprehensive information when preparing case reports. A link to this PRICE 2020 explanation and elaboration document is available on the Preferred Reporting Items for study Designs in Endodontology website at http://www.pride-endodonticguidelines.org.
“…From Sarmast et al (2017) case report titled ‘Classification and Clinical Management of Retrograde Peri‐implantitis Associated with Apical Periodontitis: A Proposed Classification System and Case Report’, the keywords used were ‘Bone regeneration, dental pulp necrosis, periapical diseases, peri‐implantitis’.…”
Section: The Price 2020 Explanation and Elaboration Documentmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…From Sarmast et al (2017) – ‘His medical history was contributory for seizures in the past; however, this was well controlled, and his last episode was more than 10 years ago. He is currently taking levetiracetam, dexlansoprazole, and clonazepam medications without complaint’.…”
Section: The Price 2020 Explanation and Elaboration Documentmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…From Sarmast et al (2017) – ‘His dental history included multiple endodontically treated teeth and fractured restorations. He presented with multiple nonrestorable teeth and missing dentition ’.…”
Section: The Price 2020 Explanation and Elaboration Documentmentioning
Case reports play a key role in showcasing new, unusual or rare disease(s), and the impact of newer therapeutic approaches or interventions. The Preferred Reporting Items for Case reports in Endodontics (PRICE) 2020 guidelines are being introduced exclusively for Endodontics by adapting and integrating the CAse REport (CARE) guidelines and Clinical and Laboratory Images in Publications principles. The PRICE 2020 guidelines have been developed to help authors improve the completeness, accuracy and transparency of case reports in Endodontics and thus enhance the standard of manuscripts submitted for publication. The aim of this document is to provide a comprehensive explanation for each item in the PRICE 2020 checklist along with examples from the literature that demonstrate compliance with these guidelines. This information will highlight the importance of each item and provide practical examples to help authors understand the necessity of providing comprehensive information when preparing case reports. A link to this PRICE 2020 explanation and elaboration document is available on the Preferred Reporting Items for study Designs in Endodontology website at http://www.pride-endodonticguidelines.org.
“…Others speculated that the bacteria itself might be responsible for modifying the rate and nature of corrosion of such metallic devices, thus predisposing the site to infection 42 . It is also worth noting that not only the bacteria are the culprit in this process; a few studies have linked viruses such as the Epstein‐Barr virus with the incidence of RPI 8,43 . Epstein‐Barr virus is occasionally associated with the pathogenesis of symptomatic periapical lesions in endodontically involved teeth and should likewise be expected to play a role when implants are placed in the same sites 44 .…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…For the etiology of RPI, some research groups have proposed that it results from either residual or active bacterial infection from previous endodontic therapy 7,8 . Other reports concluded that determining a single causative factor is groundless, and might include, previous endodontic infection, apicoectomy, residual root fragments, or previous periodontal infection 5,9‒14 …”
Background
Retrograde peri‐implantitis (RPI) is a rapidly progressing periapical infection that forms around the implant apex. It is usually associated with sites adjacent to teeth with apical lesions; previous endodontic failures, retained root fragments, etc. This study aimed to study the incidence of RPI in sites with a history of apical surgeries.
Methods
Patients with sites treated for both apicoectomy and implant placement presenting to the University of Michigan School of Dentistry from 2001 to 2016 were screened. A total of 502 apicoectomies were performed, only 25 of these fit the predetermined eligibility criteria and were thus included in this retrospective analysis.
Results
Implants that were placed in sites with a previous apical surgery had a cumulative survival rate of 92%. The incidence of peri‐implantitis was 8%, while the incidence of RPI was 20%. There was an increased trend for RPI in cases where the cause of extraction was persistent apical periodontitis (35.7%), but this increase didn't reach the level of statistical significance (P = 0.061).
Conclusion
Implants placed in sites with previous apical surgery are not at an increased risk of implant failure or RPI.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.