• Journal of Periodontal and Implant Science
• /
• 제50권3호
• /
• pp.183-196
• /
• 2020

Purpose: This practice-based cross-sectional study aimed to investigate whether common risk indicators for peri-implant diseases were associated with peri-implant mucositis and peri-implantitis in patients undergoing supportive implant therapy (SIT) at least 5 years after implant restoration. Methods: Patients exclusively restored with a single implant type were included. Probing pocket depth (PPD), bleeding on probing (BOP), suppuration, and radiographic bone loss (RBL) were assessed around implants. The case definitions were as follows: peri-implant mucositis: PPD ≥4 mm, BOP, no RBL; and peri-implantitis: PPD ≥5 mm, BOP, RBL ≥3.5 mm. Possible risk indicators were compared between patients with and without mucositis and peri-implantitis using the Fisher exact test and the Wilcoxon rank-sum test, as well as a multiple logistic regression model for variables showing significance (P<0.05). Results: Eighty-four patients with 169 implants (observational period: 5.8±0.86 years) were included. A patient-based prevalence of 52% for peri-implant mucositis and 18% for peri-implantitis was detected. The presence of 3 or more implants (odds ratio [OR], 4.43; 95 confidence interval [CI], 1.36-15.05; P=0.0136) was significantly associated with an increased risk for mucositis. Smoking was significantly associated with an increased risk for peri-implantitis (OR, 5.89; 95% CI, 1.27-24.58; P=0.0231), while the presence of keratinized mucosa around implants was associated with a lower risk for peri-implantitis (OR, 0.05; 95% CI, 0.01-0.25; P<0.001). Conclusions: The number of implants should be considered in strategies to prevent mucositis. Furthermore, smoking and the absence of keratinized mucosa were the strongest risk indicators for peri-implantitis in patients undergoing SIT in the present study.

• Journal of Periodontal and Implant Science
• /
• 제53권2호
• /
• pp.145-156
• /
• 2023

Purpose: The significance of keratinized tissue for peri-implant health has been emphasized. However, there is an absence of clinical evidence for the use of a xenogeneic collagen matrix (XCM) to manage peri-implant mucositis and peri-implantitis. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to investigate outcomes after keratinized tissue augmentation using an XCM for the management of peri-implant diseases. Methods: Twelve implants (5 with peri-implant mucositis and 7 with peri-implantitis) in 10 patients were included in this study. Non-surgical treatments were first performed, but inflammation persisted in all implant sites. The implant sites all showed a lack of keratinized mucosa (KM) and vestibular depth (VD). Apically positioned flaps with XCM application were performed. Bone augmentation was simultaneously performed on peri-implantitis sites with an intrabony defect (>3 mm). The following clinical parameters were measured: the probing pocket depth (PPD), modified sulcular bleeding index (mSBI), suppuration (SUP), keratinized mucosal height (KMH), and VD. Results: There were no adverse healing events during the follow-up visits (18±4.6 months). The final KMHs and VDs were 4.34±0.86 mm and 8.0±4.05 mm, respectively, for the sites with peri-implant mucositis and 3.29±0.86 mm and 6.5±1.91 mm, respectively, for the sites with peri-implantitis. Additionally, the PPD and mSBI significantly decreased, and none of the implants presented with SUP. Conclusions: Keratinized tissue augmentation using an XCM for sites with peri-implant mucositis and peri-implantitis was effective for increasing the KMH and VD and decreasing peri-implant inflammation.

• 대한치과의사협회지
• /
• 제52권7호
• /
• pp.408-415
• /
• 2014

Peri-implant diseases are inflammatory lesions, which include peri-implant mucositis and peri-implantitis. Peri-implant mucositis is described as the presence of inflammation in the mucosa around implants without any bone loss. By contrast, in peri-implantitis, besides the inflammation in the peri-implant mucosa, loss of supporting bone is also seen. Diagnosis of peri-implant diseases require the use of gentle probing(0.2 ~ 0.3N) to identify the presence of bleeding on probing, probing depth and suppuration, both signs of clinical inflammation. Radiographs are required to detect loss of supporting bone. Baseline probing measurements and high quality, long cone periapical radiographs should be obtained once the restoration of the implant is completed to make possible longitudinal monitoring of peri-implant tissue.

• 대한치과의사협회지
• /
• 제54권4호
• /
• pp.252-257
• /
• 2016

This manuscript aims at discussing the technical and biological aspects of peri-implant disease. The following contents will be discussed. -The difference between peri-implantitis and peri-implant mucositis. -Prevalence of peri-implant disease. -Risk factors for peri-implantitis. -Indications and boundaries of non-surgical and surgical treatment -Treatment flow-chart by Schwarz -Limitations of non-surgical treatment -Methods to decontaminate diseased surfaces -Importance of defect configuration in surgical treatment -Biomechanical factors that influence the progression and decontamination related to peri-implantitis -Maintenance of implants.

• Journal of Periodontal and Implant Science
• /
• 제49권6호
• /
• pp.397-405
• /
• 2019

Purpose: This study examined the prevalence and risk factors of peri-implant disease after at least 7 years of dental implant loading. Methods: A total of 111 patients with 218 dental implants were treated. The follow-up period for all implants was at least 7 years. The patients' dental records were collected and risk factors of peri-implant disease were investigated through logistic regression analysis. Results: The overall implant survival rate was 95.87%, because 9 of the 218 implants failed. The prevalence of peri-implant mucositis and peri-implantitis was 39.7% and 16.7%, respectively. As risk factors, smoking and prosthetic splinting showed significant associations with peri-implantitis (P<0.05). Conclusions: Within the limits of this study, no significant correlations were found between any risk factors and peri-implant mucositis, but a significantly elevated risk of peri-implantitis was observed in patients who smoked or had splinted prostheses in 2 or more implants.

• 대한치과의사협회지
• /
• 제52권7호
• /
• pp.396-401
• /
• 2014

Peri-implantitis is an inflammatory disease of the peri-implant tissue by bacterial infection or other factors, which results in peri-implant bone loss. Many nonsurgical treatments were tried on initial to moderate peri-implantitis lesion to reduce the inflammation. Some of these treatments made effective results, however, they were not definitively predictable. To prevent peri-implantitis and further peri-implant bone loss, early intervention is the most important. Early detection of peri-implant infection through the regular maintenance care can make it possible to do early nonsurgical intervention. Nonsurgical intervention is effective on peri-implant mucositis and can also be effective on initial peri-implantitis lesion. If the peri-implantitis is not resolves by nonsurgical treatment, surgical approach should be considered.

• Journal of Periodontal and Implant Science
• /
• 제54권3호
• /
• pp.161-176
• /
• 2024

Purpose: Peri-implant mucositis (PIM) and peri-implantitis (PI) are multicausal conditions with several risk factors contributing to their pathogenesis. In this study, we retrospectively investigated risk variables potentially associated with these peri-implant diseases (PIDs) over a follow-up period of 1 to 18 years. Methods: The study sample consisted of 379 implants placed in 155 patients. Single-visit clinical and radiographic evaluations were employed to determine the presence or absence of PIDs. Parameters related to the patient, site, surgery, implant, and prosthetic restoration were documented. The relationships between risk variables and the occurrence of PIDs were individually examined and adjusted for confounders using multivariate binary logistic regression models. Results: The prevalence rates of PIM and PI were 28.4% and 36.8% at the patient level and 33.5% and 24.5% at the implant level, respectively. Poor oral hygiene, active gingivitis/periodontitis, preoperative alveolar ridge deficiency, early or delayed implant placement, implant length of 11.0 mm or less, and poor restoration quality were strong and independent risk indicators for both PIDs. Furthermore, a follow-up period of more than 5 years and a loading time of more than 4 years were important indicators for PI. Simultaneously, age and smoking status acted as modifiers of the effect of mesiodistal (MD) and buccolingual (BL) widths of restoration on PI. Conclusions: In this study population, oral hygiene, periodontal status, preoperative alveolar ridge status, implant placement protocol, implant length, and the quality of coronal restoration appear to be robust risk indicators for both PIM and PI. Additionally, the length of follow-up and functional loading time are robust indicators of PI. Furthermore, the potential modifying relationships of age and smoking status with the MD and BL widths of restoration may be crucial for the development of PI.

• 대한치과의사협회지
• /
• 제57권12호
• /
• pp.758-767
• /
• 2019

The classification of periodontal disease in 1999 has been widely used for determining a diagnosis, establishing a treatment plan, and evaluating the prognosis of the patient with periodontal disease. However, scientific evidence from many studies indicates the need for a new classification system for periodontal and peri-implant disease. Summary at 2017 world workshop as follows: 1) Periodontal health and peri-implant health was defined; 2) Chronic periodontitis and aggressive periodontitis were unified as periodontitis; 3) Periodontitis was further classified by staging and grading to reflect disease severity and management complexity, rate of disease progression, respectively; 4) Periodontal disease as manifestation of systemic disease is based on the International Statistical Classification of Diseases and Related Health Problems-10 (ICD-10) code; 5) Periodontal biotype and biologic width was replaced to periodontal phenotype and supracrestal tissue attachment, respectively; 6) The excessive occlusal force was replaced by a traumatic occlusal force; 7) ≥3 mm of radiographic bone loss, ≥6 mm of pocket probing depth and bleeding on probing indicates peri-implantitis in the absence of radiograph at final prosthesis delivery.

• Journal of Periodontal and Implant Science
• /
• 제42권1호
• /
• pp.13-19
• /
• 2012

Purpose: The aim of this study was to examine whether a previous peri-implantitis site can affect osseointegration, by comparing implant placement at a site where peri-implantitis was present and at a normal bone site. A second aim of this study was to identify the tissue and bone reaction after treating the contaminated implant surface to determine the optimal treatment for peri-implant diseases. Methods: A peri-implant mucositis model for dogs was prepared to determine the optimal treatment option for peri-implant mucositis or peri-implantitis. The implants were inserted partially to a length of 6 mm. The upper 4 mm part of the dental implants was exposed to the oral environment. Simple exposure for 2 weeks contaminated the implant surface. After 2 weeks, the implants were divided into three groups: untreated, swabbed with saline, and swabbed with $H_2O_2$. Three implants from each group were placed to the full length in the same spot. The other three implants were placed fully into newly prepared bone. After eight weeks of healing, the animals were sacrificed. Ground sections, representing the mid-buccal-lingual plane, were prepared for histological analysis. The analysis was evaluated clinically and histometrically. Results: The untreated implants and $H_2O_2$-swabbed implants showed gingival inflammation. Only the saline-swabbed implant group showed re-osseointegration and no gingival inflammation. There was no difference in regeneration height or bone-to-implant contact between in situ implant placement and implant placement in the new bone site. Conclusions: It can be concluded that cleaning with saline may be effective in implant decontamination. After implant surface decontamination, implant installation in a previous peri-implant diseased site may not interfere with osseointegration.

• Journal of Periodontal and Implant Science
• /
• 제46권3호
• /
• pp.136-151
• /
• 2016

Peri-implant disease is a serious problem that plagues today's dentistry, both in terms of therapy and epidemiology. With the expansion of the practice of implantology and an increasing number of implants placed annually, the frequency of peri-implant disease has greatly expanded. Its clinical manifestations, in the absence of a globally established classification, are peri-implant mucositis and peri-implantitis, the counterparts of gingivitis and periodontitis, respectively. However, many doubts remain about its features. Official diagnostic criteria, globally recognized by the dental community, have not yet been introduced. The latest studies using metagenomic methods are casting doubt on the assumption of microbial equivalence between periodontal and peri-implant crevices. Research on most of the features of peri-implant disease remains at an early stage; moreover, there is not a commonly accepted treatment for it. In any case, although the evidence so far collected is limited, we need to be aware of the current state of the science regarding this topic to better understand and ultimately prevent this disease.