Differences in peri-implant conditions between fully and partially edentulous subjects: A systematic review

Center for Dentistry and Oral Hygiene, University of Groningen, University Medical Center Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands.
Journal Of Clinical Periodontology (Impact Factor: 4.01). 03/2013; 40(3):266-86. DOI: 10.1111/jcpe.12013
Source: PubMed


The aim of this study was to compare peri-implant conditions between fully edentulous (FES) and partially edentulous subjects (PES).
A systematic review was conducted. The MEDLINE, EMBASE and COCHRANE databases were searched for publications up to January 1st 2012. Studies reporting on the bleeding tendency of the peri-implant mucosa and/or studies reporting on the prevalence of peri-implant mucositis and/or peri-implantitis were considered.
Fifty-five publications describing 46 studies were selected. One study described both FES and PES, and all other studies described either FES or PES. Subgroup analyses were performed according to dental status (fully/partially edentulous), follow-up time (≥5 years and ≥ 10 years) and study design (prospective/cross-sectional). FES harboured more plaque at their implants than PES. Modified bleeding index scores were significantly higher in FES, but no differences in bleeding on probing, implant loss and probing pocket depth were observed between FES and PES. No meta-analysis could be performed on prevalence of peri-implant mucositis and peri-implantitis. Overall prevalence of peri-implantitis was 0-3.4% after 5 years and 5.8-16.9% after 10 years of implant evaluation.
FES and PES show comparable implant survival rates. However, no conclusion can be drawn regarding differences in prevalence of peri-implant mucositis and peri-implantitis between FES and PES.

1 Follower
41 Reads
    • "Dental implants have been the treatment of choice to replace missing teeth in the last decades with good clinical results in terms of survival and success rates (Jung et al. 2012; Pjetursson et al. 2012; Romeo & Storelli 2012). However, biological complications as peri-implant mucositis and peri-implantitis, have been shown commonly in recent systematic reviews (Zitzmann & Berglundh 2008; Mombelli et al. 2012; Atieh et al. 2013; de Waal et al. 2013). The prevalence of periimplant mucositis reported in those systematic reviews is around 60% on patients with implants and 30% of the implants. "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Objectives To investigate soft tissue histomorphology and quality around implants with a modified transgingival collar surface comparatively to a machined.Material and methodsTwenty-seven Straumann Standard Tissue Level implants belonging to the following groups (nine of each group): Ti modSLA with machined collar (Ti-M), Ti modSLA with machined, acid-etched surface collar (Ti-modMA), and TiZr modSLA with machined, acid-etched surface collar (TiZr-modMA) were placed in the mandible of six minipigs. After 8 weeks of healing, buccal sections were obtained and processed for histological evaluation.ResultsHistometric soft tissue outcomes were similar for the three types of implants. The percentage of connective tissue attached to implant surface and its length was longer at TiZr-modMA with respect to Ti-M implants. The number of inflammatory cells was slightly higher at the TiZr-modMA with respect to Ti-M implant. The percentage of area occupied by perpendicular collagen fibers was slightly higher for the modified surfaces in comparison with the machined.Conclusions Modified implant collar surfaces at Ti and TiZr implants showed a soft tissue interface similar to machined. A tendency of increasing number of perpendicular collagen fibers and improved connective tissue contact was found at the modified implant surfaces.
    Clinical Oral Implants Research 05/2014; 26(9). DOI:10.1111/clr.12417 · 3.89 Impact Factor
  • Source
    • "Although pathogenic microflora are the main cause of peri-implantitis, iatrogenic factors such as poorly positioned implants, excess of luting cements and over-contoured restorations can accelerate the disease. Peri-implantitis is an acute inflammation that progresses deeper and faster around dental implants than in the adjacent natural teeth [16], and shows a higher prevalence in patients with chronic periodontitis [17]. Further risk factors arise from nicotine abuse, non-adjusted diabetes, lack of gingival substance and insufficient oral hygiene [11]. "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Periodontal diseases like periodontitis and peri-implantitis have been linked with Gram-negative anaerobes. The incorporation of various chemotherapeutic agents, including metal ions, into several materials and devices has been extensively studied against periodontal bacteria and materials doped with metal ions have been proposed for the treatment of periodontal and peri-implant diseases. The aim of this review is to discuss the effectiveness of materials doped with metal and metalloid ions already used in the treatment of periodontal diseases as well as the potential use of alternative materials that are currently available for other applications but have been proven to be cytotoxic to the specific periodontal pathogens. The sources of this review included English articles using Google Scholar™, ScienceDirect, Scopus, and PubMed. Search terms included the combinations of the descriptors "disease", "ionic species" and "bacterium". Articles that discuss the biocidal properties of materials doped with metal and metalloid ions against the specific periodontal bacteria were included. The articles were independently extracted by 2 authors using predefined data fields. The evaluation of resources was based on the quality of the content and the relevance to the topic, which was evaluated by the ionic species and the bacteria used in the study, while the final application was not considered as relevant. The present review summarizes the extensive previous and current research efforts concerning the use of metal ions in periodontal diseases therapy, while it points out the challenges and opportunities lying ahead.
    Acta biomaterialia 04/2014; 10(8). DOI:10.1016/j.actbio.2014.03.028 · 6.03 Impact Factor
  • Source
    • "The available data is too limited to draw conclusions about the possible differences in prevalence of peri-implant mucositis and peri-implantitis between fully and partially edentulous patients [13]. However, available evidence highlights the importance of eliminating potential reservoirs of periodontal pathogens before implant placement. "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Introduction There are numerous studies supporting the high success rate of dental implants used for reconstruction of missing teeth. However, complications like mucositis and peri-implantitis are increasingly reported. Placement of dental implants in partially edentulous patients is associated with the risk of peri-implant diseases, especially when an old or a new inflammatory lesion is present adjacent to the implant site. Although no consensus has been reached on the difference in prevalence of peri-implant mucositis and peri-implantitis between fully and partially edentulous patients, available data clearly show that the combination of periodontal lesion and peri-implantitis is a possible risk factor for further complications. Several classification systems have been suggested for determination of the severity of disease around dental implants. However, no classification has been proposed for combined biological complications around teeth and implants. This study reviews the possible pathologic communication routes between natural dentition and the implants installed adjacent to them. Furthermore, we introduce a new classification system for the peri-implant disease in association with natural teeth called “PIST”. This system was designed based on the origin of the defects in order to clarify the different pathological situations which can be detected around dental implant. Using this classification system can help improve diagnosis, comparison and subsequent selection of the best treatment option.
    Iranian Endodontic Journal 08/2013; 8(3):103-8.
Show more