Incidence of retrograde peri‐implantitis in sites with previous apical surgeries: A retrospective study

Abstract

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.

The Incidence of Retrograde Peri-Implantitis in a Single University Dental Hospital Training Center: A Retrospective Analysis

“…Lefever et al [ 23 ] showed a much higher incidence, with around 14% of the cases adjacent to teeth with PAL showing RPI. Another study showed that sites with previous endodontic failure and apical surgery show RPI in 20% of the cases [ 29 ]. In the present study, the sites with previous endodontic involvement did not show an increased risk of RPI.…”

Implant Periapical Lesion: A Narrative Review

“…Moreover, the odds of developing early IPL in implant sites with apical lesion was up to 26.3-fold [14]. However, recent retrospective study including 25 patients showed that previous endodontic surgery in implant site did not increase risk of IPL [41].…”

Knowledge and Attitude towards Retrograde Peri-Implantitis among Italian Implantologists: A Cross-Sectional Survey

“…This implant disease was first described by McAllister et al [ 17 ] in 1992 and seems to have an incidence ranging from 0.26% to 1.86% [ 18 , 19 , 20 , 21 ], significantly lower than marginal peri-implantitis. Although the etiology of this lesion is still unclear [ 22 ], according to several authors, the causes more accredited could be the residual infection/inflammation of the tooth replaced by the implant or the endodontic lesion of neighboring teeth [ 13 , 23 , 24 ]. Among other factors hypothesized, there are bone overheating or implant insertion in a site with residual granulomatous/cystic lesions [ 22 ].…”