Impact of implant location on the prevalence of peri-implantitis: A systematic review and meta- analysis

Song, Xiao; Li, Lü; Gou, Huiqing; Xu, Yan

doi:10.1016/j.jdent.2020.103490

Cited by 16 publications

(13 citation statements)

References 34 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Specifically, anterior implants were strongly associated with peri‐implantitis in our study (Table 3). This result is consistent with other systematic reviews and meta‐analyses that reported a higher prevalence of peri‐implantitis in the anterior regions in comparison with posterior regions 21 . It is thought that anteriorly malpositioned implants might more often be restored with cement‐retained, fixed implant‐supported restorations for esthetic reasons.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 91%

“…This result is consistent with other systematic reviews and meta-analyses that reported a higher prevalence of peri-implantitis in the anterior regions in comparison with posterior regions. 21 It is thought that anteriorly malpositioned implants might more often be restored with cement-retained, fixed implant-supported restorations for esthetic reasons. This can be associated with peri-implantitis because of the risk of excess cement.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Dental implant proximity to adjacent teeth: A retrospective study

Han

Kim

et al. 2022

Clin Implant Dent Rel Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background and Purpose The purpose of this study was to assess the occurrence and prognosis of dental implant proximity or direct contact with the adjacent tooth and to evaluate the symptoms and complications in both the implant and the adjacent tooth. We then elaborate on treatment modalities and discuss the prevention of this phenomenon. Materials and Methods This retrospective study was conducted based on the dental clinical and radiographic records of 43 patients with implant‐tooth proximity of <1.0 mm or direct implant‐tooth contact. Multivariate Bayesian logistic regression was performed to examine the influence of individual variables on correcting major clinical variables. Results In the multivariate regression analysis, the rate of occurrence of tooth symptom decreased by about 95% with every increase of 1.0 mm distance between implant and tooth (odds ratio [OR] = 0.1, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.004–0.680, p = 0.024). In the case of implant‐tooth root proximity in the anterior area, the OR of peri‐implantitis occurrence was 30.4‐fold greater than in posterior sites (OR = 30.4, 95% CI: 1.189–785.914, p = 0.040). Conclusion Implant‐tooth root proximity or direct implant‐tooth contact is an iatrogenic factor that causes various complications, including devitalization of the adjacent tooth and peri‐implantitis. Proactive prevention with surgical stents and intra‐operative periapical radiographs is needed. If proximity or contact is found during surgery, repositioning of the fixture to the correct location is recommended in order to maintain peri‐implant health and prevent complications.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 91%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Dental implant proximity to adjacent teeth: A retrospective study

Han

Kim

et al. 2022

Clin Implant Dent Rel Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…As such, in alveolar structures dominated by cortical bone, where higher implant primary stability is anticipated such as the anterior mandible, distance osteogenesis takes place, resulting in the formation of de novo bone preceded by the osteoclastogenesis of the existing tissue 38 . This may explain in part, the higher rate of peri‐implantitis in highly dense bone (i.e., anterior mandible) when compared with other areas featured by more porous bone 39 . In contrast, in the achievement of implant placement via low insertion torque, the implant surface is immediately populated by bone cells after insertion.…”

Section: Impact Of Local Predisposing Factorsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Impact of local predisposing/precipitating factors and systemic drivers on peri‐implant diseases

Monje

Kan

Borgnakke

2022

Clin Implant Dent Rel Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Strong evidence suggests the infectious nature of peri‐implant diseases occurring in susceptible hosts. Epidemiological reports, though, indicate that peri‐implantitis is a site‐specific entity. Hence, the significance of local factors that may predispose/precipitate plaque accumulation and the impact of systemic drivers that alter the immune response are relevant in the prevention and management of peri‐implant disorders. Purpose The purpose of the present review is to shed light on the significance of local and systemic factors on peri‐implant diseases, making special emphasis on the associations with peri‐implantitis. Methods The biologic plausibility and supporting evidence aiming at providing a concluding remark were explored in the recent scientific literature for local predisposing/precipitating factors and systemic drivers related to peri‐implant diseases. Results Local predisposing factors such as soft tissue characteristics, implant position and prosthetic design proved being strongly associated with the occurrence of peri‐implant diseases. Hard tissue characteristics, however, failed to demonstrate having a direct association with peri‐implant diseases. Robust data points toward the strong link between residual sub‐mucosal cement and peri‐implant diseases, while limited data suggests the impact of residual sub‐mucosal floss and peri‐implantitis. Systemic drivers/habits such as hyperglycemia and smoking showed a strong negative impact on peri‐implantitis. However, there is insufficient evidence to claim for any link between metabolic syndrome, atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease, and obesity and peri‐implant diseases. Conclusion Local predisposing/precipitating factors and systemic drivers may increase the risk of peri‐implant diseases. Therefore, comprehensive anamnesis of the patients, educational/motivational programs and exhaustive prosthetically‐driven treatment planning must be fostered aiming at reducing the rate of biological complications in implant dentistry.

show abstract

“…Peri-implantitis is one of the most common and difficult complications after placement of dental implants. The incidence of peri-implantitis is around 7.3%–28.3% ( Song et al., 2020 ). As a frequent cause of peri-implantitis, bacterial infection can lead to a continuous inflammatory reaction that affects peri-implant hard and soft tissues.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Microbiota in Gingival Crevicular Fluid Before and After Mechanical Debridement With Antimicrobial Photodynamic Therapy in Peri-Implantitis

Wang

Liu

et al. 2022

Front. Cell. Infect. Microbiol.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ObjectivesThis study aims to compare the microbiota of gingival crevicular fluid (GCF) before and after mechanical debridement (MD) with antimicrobial photodynamic therapy (aPDT) and determine the core efficient microbiota in peri-implantitis after treatment.MethodsWe recruited 9 patients (14 implants) treated with MD+aPDT for peri-implantitis at our center from February 1, 2018, to February 1, 2019. GCF was collected using filter paper strip before and after the treatment. The bacterial 16S rRNA was amplified and sequenced using an Illumina MiSeq platform to characterize the GCF. Bioinformatics and statistical analyses were performed using QIIME2 and R.ResultsA total of 4,110,861 high-quality sequences were obtained from GCF samples. Based on the reference database, 1,120 amplicon sequence variants (ASVs) were finally harvested. Principal coordinates analysis indicated significant differences in the bacterial community structure between the 180 days after-treatment group and pre-treatment group. Difference analysis and least discriminant analysis showed that the differences were mainly reflected in non-dominant bacteria between these two groups. The non-dominant genera with significantly different distribution between the 180 days after-treatment group and the pre-treatment group included Lactobacillus, Pedobacter, Bulleidia, Centipeda, Desulfovibrio, Ochrobactrum, Staphylococcus, Microbacterium, Brevundimonas, Desulfobulbus, and Parvimonas. Moreover, a total of 29 predictive functional categories at KEGG level 2 were identified. The significant difference pathways at KEGG level 2 between after-treatment and pre-treatment were concentrated in infectious disease-related pathways.ConclusionsPatients with peri-implantitis have significant changes in the low-abundance bacteria of the GCF before and after MD+aPDT. MD+aPDT may change the composition of GCF microbiota by increasing the abundance of cluster 1 (beneficial) and decreasing that of cluster 4 (harmful), which may decrease metabolic response to infection and thus improve peri-implantitis.

show abstract

Impact of implant location on the prevalence of peri-implantitis: A systematic review and meta- analysis

Cited by 16 publications

References 34 publications

Dental implant proximity to adjacent teeth: A retrospective study

Dental implant proximity to adjacent teeth: A retrospective study

Impact of local predisposing/precipitating factors and systemic drivers on peri‐implant diseases

Microbiota in Gingival Crevicular Fluid Before and After Mechanical Debridement With Antimicrobial Photodynamic Therapy in Peri-Implantitis

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About