The lack of keratinized mucosa is associated with poor peri-implant tissue health: a cross-sectional study

Abstract

Objectives The aim of this cross-sectional study is to determine the association between the absence of keratinized mucosa and peri-implant tissue health. Methods and materials This cross-sectional study comprised 412 implants from 200 patients from faculty-based clinics. Demographic, medical, and clinical information were collected. The modified sulcus bleeding index, modified plaque index, mucosal recession, probing depth, bone level, the width of keratinized mucosa, and implant status were evaluated by three calibrated examiners. Each implant was categorized into either of two peri-implant mucosa groups: keratinized mucosa (KM) or non-keratinized mucosa (NKM). The chi-square test was performed to the association between the keratinized mucosa groups and peri-implant clinical parameters and peri-implant status. Multiple logistic regression models were analyzed to test potential associations between peri-implant clinical parameters and the presence or absence of keratinized mucosa. Results Thirty-two implants (7.8%) were categorized into the NKM group. The prevalence of peri-implantitis was 12.5% and 8.3% at the subject level and implant level, respectively. The NKM group was associated with more plaque accumulation, mucosal recession, interproximal bone level ≥ 3 mm, and peri-implantitis ( p < 0.05). After controlling for confounding factors, the NKM group demonstrated higher plaque accumulation, mucosal recession, and interproximal bone level ≥ 3 mm with adjusted odds ratios of 2.98 (1.33–6.66), 3.20 (95% CI, 1.03–9.90), and 4.62 (1.70–12.58), respectively. Conclusion Within the limitation of this study, the lack of keratinized mucosa around the dental implants was significantly associated with more plaque accumulation, mucosal recession, interproximal bone level ≥ 3 mm, and peri-implantitis.

A retrospective comparison of 3 approaches of vestibuloplasty around mandibular molar implants: apically positioned flap versus free gingival graft versus modified periosteal fenestration

“…Many studies have focused on the relationship between the width of keratinized tissue (KT) and peri-implant health. Several reports have presented associations between improved esthetic results, peri-implant health, implant survival, and adequate KT width [ 1 2 3 ]. However, other reports have found that there were minimal or no associations among involution of the peri-implant tissue, implant survival, and the width of KT [ 4 5 ].…”

Peri-implant keratinized gingiva augmentation using xenogeneic collagen matrix and platelet-rich fibrin: A case report

“…In contrast, dental implants are wrapped annularly by connective tissue, relying only on hemidesmosome connections[ 6 ]. Peri-implant gingiva is so easy to move, thereby causing peri-implantitis that is attributed to bacterial invasion[ 7 ]. From another perspective, the attached gingiva of healthy teeth is composed of keratinized gingiva.…”

Keratinizuotų Dantenų Įtaka Periimplantinių Audinių Sveikatai

“…Recesijų atsiradimas aplink dantų implantus turi neigiamos įtakos estetikai ir kokybiškai individualiai burnos higienai. Dauguma naujausių tyrimų nurodo nepakankamo KDP įtaką recesijų atsiradimui [9,19,21,22,28,33]. Naujausi bent 5 metų trukmės kokybiniai tyrimai apibendrinti V. Iorio-Siciliano ir bendraautorių [34] sisteminėje apžvalgoje, kurioje aprašytos dvi studijos, kai didesnės recesijos atsirado esant <2 mm KDP.…”