Implant Disease Risk Assessment IDRA–a tool for preventing peri‐implant disease

Abstract

Objective This treatment concept paper introduces a risk assessment tool, the Implant Disease Risk Assessment, (IDRA) which estimates the risk for a patient to develop peri‐implantitis. Materials and methods The functional risk assessment diagram was constructed incorporating eight parameters, each with documented evidence for an association with peri‐implantitis. Results The eight vectors of the diagram include (1) assessment of a history of periodontitis (2) percentage of sites with bleeding on probing (BOP) (3) number of teeth/implants with probing depths (PD) ≥5 mm (4) the ratio of periodontal bone loss (evaluated from a radiograph) divided by the patient's age (5) periodontitis susceptibility as described by the staging and grading categories from the 2017 World Workshop on the Classification of Periodontal and Peri‐implant Diseases (Journal of Periodontology, 89 Suppl 1, S159‐S172, 2018) (6) the frequency/compliance with supportive periodontal therapy (7) the distance in mm from the restorative margin of the implant‐supported prosthesis to the marginal bone crest and (8) prosthesis‐related factors including cleanability and fit of the implant‐supported prosthesis. Conclusion The combination of these factors in a risk assessment tool, IDRA, may be useful in identifying individuals at risk for development of peri‐implantitis.

Prevalence and risk/protective indicators of peri‐implant diseases: A university‐representative cross‐sectional study

“…The extent of peri-implantitis in patients with >1 implant was 43.6%. This percentage is similar to the few reports of this epidemiological descriptor which are present in the literature, which ranges from 37.2% of Mir-Mari et al (Mir-Mari et al, 2012) to 38.2% of Vignoletti et al, (2019), 40.1% of Derks et al (Derks et al, 2016a), and 41.8% of Fransson et al (Fransson et al, 2009).…”

“…The main strategy for preventing peri-implantitis is the management of peri-implant mucositis (Barootchi et al, 2020;Jepsen et al, 2015), since this condition is its reversible precursor (Berglundh, Armitage, et al, 2018;Costa et al, 2012). This approach should be combined with the control of modifiable risk factors, although presently there are a limited number of true risk factors of peri-implantitis demonstrated in prospective cohort investigations (Heitz-Mayfield et al, 2020;Schwarz et al, 2018). Consequently, a fundamental thrive in current implant research is the identification of further risk factors and indicators of peri-implant diseases.…”

Prevalence and risk/protective indicators of peri-implant diseases: a university-representative cross-sectional study

“…The main strategy for preventing peri-implantitis is the management of peri-implant mucositis (Barootchi, Ravidà, Tavelli, & Wang, 2020; Jepsen et al, 2015), since this condition is its reversible precursor (Berglundh et al, 2018a; Costa et al, 2012). This approach should be combined with the control of modifiable risk factors, although presently there is a limited number of true risk factors of peri-implantitis demonstrated in prospective cohort investigations (Heitz-Mayfield & Salvi, 2018; Heitz-Mayfield, Heitz, & Lang, 2020; Schwarz, Derks, Monje, & Wang, 2018). Consequently, a fundamental thrive in current implant research is the identification of further risk factors and indicators of peri-implant diseases.…”

Nonsurgical Treatment of Peri-Implantitis: Case Series

“…Over the last 30 years, dental implants have become the most viable and effective treatment for partial and complete edentulous arches, providing effective masticatory function and esthetics. However, the spread of dental implants in the past decades have brought to light the importance of preventing, diagnosing, and treating peri-implant diseases, because of their important prevalence in the population, over time [1][2][3][4][5].…”