-
The International Journal of Oral &...Since their development, dental implants have become one of the most common procedures to rehabilitate patients with single missing teeth or fully edentulous jaws. As...
Since their development, dental implants have become one of the most common procedures to rehabilitate patients with single missing teeth or fully edentulous jaws. As implants become more mainstream, determining the factors that affect osseointegration is extremely important. Medical risk factors identified to negatively affect osseointegration include diabetes and osteoporosis. However, other systemic conditions and medications that interfere with wound healing have not been as widely investigated. The aim of this systematic review was to evaluate the effect of systemic disorders including diabetes and osteoporosis on implant osseointegration. The aim was also to evaluate the effect of other diseases, such as neurocognitive diseases, cardiovascular disease, human immunodeficiency virus (HIV), hypothyroidism, rheumatoid arthritis, and medications, such as selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs), proton pump inhibitors (PPIs), and antihypertensives. Although the literature does not demonstrate that diabetes negatively affects implant osseointegration, most studies focus on well-controlled diabetics and the use of prophylactic antibiotics. In addition, studies have shown increased long-term bone and soft tissue complications. For osteoporosis, recent studies and reviews also fail to demonstrate a lower osseointegration rate. However, caution must be exercised in these patients due to the risk for osteonecrosis of the jaws (ONJ), especially in patients with bone malignancies. There is also no direct evidence that patients with HIV, cardiovascular disease, neurologic disorders, hypothyroidism, or rheumatoid arthritis have a decreased rate of implant osseointegration. However, some preliminary evidence suggests that medications such as SSRIs or PPIs may have a negative effect on implant osseointegration. These studies are fairly recent and must be validated with continuous research. Moreover, disease control, concomitant medications, and other comorbidities complicate implant osseointegration and must guide our treatment approaches and clinical guidelines.
Topics: Cardiovascular Diseases; Communicable Diseases; Comorbidity; Contraindications; Dental Implantation, Endosseous; Dental Implants; Humans; Metabolic Diseases; Musculoskeletal Diseases; Neurocognitive Disorders; Osseointegration; Prescription Drugs; Wound Healing
PubMed: 31116832
DOI: 10.11607/jomi.19suppl.g3 -
Journal of Clinical Medicine Feb 2023Among the common procedures in clinical practice in the field of dentistry is prosthetic rehabilitation through the insertion of dental implants. In order to obtain the... (Review)
Review
Among the common procedures in clinical practice in the field of dentistry is prosthetic rehabilitation through the insertion of dental implants. In order to obtain the best aesthetic and functional results, the oral surgeon who deals with implantology must be able to position the dental implants correctly; a crucial role is therefore played by the diagnostic and treatment planning phases, where attention must be paid to anatomical constraints and prosthetic constraints in the alveolar bone site. The parameters, such as bone quality, bone volume, and anatomical restrictions, can be processed and simulated using implant planning software. The simulation of the virtual positioning of the implant can lead to the construction of a three-dimensional model of the implant positioning guide, which can be used during the implant surgery. The aim of this systematic review is to evaluate survival rates, early and late failure rates, peri-implant bone remodeling, and possible implant-prosthetic complications related to implants placed using digitally designed surgical guides. This systematic review was written following the indications of PRISMA and envisaged the use of 3 databases: Scopus, PubMed, and Cochrane Library. Results: Only 9 of the 2001 records were included, including 2 retrospective studies and 7 prospective studies. Conclusion: On the basis of the studies selected in this review, it can be seen that the implant survival obtained with the use of guided implant surgery shows high percentages. Many recorded failures occurred early, due to a lack of osseointegration, and the variables that come into play in the survival of the implants are many.
PubMed: 36836025
DOI: 10.3390/jcm12041490 -
International Journal of Implant... Apr 2022The aim of this study was to systematically review the available evidence to evaluate the efficacy of vitamin D supplementation or vitamin D depletion on the... (Review)
Review
PURPOSE
The aim of this study was to systematically review the available evidence to evaluate the efficacy of vitamin D supplementation or vitamin D depletion on the osseointegration of implants in animals and humans.
METHODS
The focus questions addressed were "Do vitamin D deficient subjects treated with (dental) implants have an inferior osseointegration than subjects with adequate serum vitamin D level?" and "Do vitamin D supplemented subjects treated with (dental) implants have a superior osseointegration than subjects with adequate serum vitamin D level?" Humans and animals were considered as subjects in this study. Databases were searched from 1969 up to and including March 2021 using different combination of the following terms: "implant", "bone to implant contact", "vitamin D" and "osseointegration". Letters to the editor, historic reviews, commentaries and articles published in languages other than English and German were excluded. The pattern of the present systematic review was customize to primarily summarize the pertinent data.
RESULTS
Thirteen experimental studies with animals as subject, two clinical studies and three case reports, with humans as subjects, were included. The amount of inserted titanium implants ranged between 24 and 1740. Results from three animal studies showed that vitamin D deficiency has a negative effect on new bone formation and/or bone to implant contact (BIC). Eight animal studies showed that vitamin D supplementation has a enhancing effect on BIC and/or new bone formation around implants. Furthermore, enhancing the impact of vitamin D supplementation on the osseointegration of implants in subjects with diabetes mellitus, osteoporosis and chronic kidney disease (CKD) were assessed. Studies and case reports involving human subjects showed that patients with a low serum vitamin D level have a higher tendency to exhibit an early dental implant failure. When supplemented with vitamin D the osseointegration was successful in the case reports and a beneficial impact on the changes in the bone level during the osseointegration were determined.
CONCLUSIONS
Vitamin D deficiency seems to have a negative effect on the osseointegration of implants in animals. The supplementation of vitamin D appears to improve the osseointegration in animals with systemic diseases, such as vitamin D deficiency, diabetes mellitus, osteoporosis, and CKD. Slight evidence supports the hypothesis that humans similarly benefit from vitamin D supplementation in terms of osseointegration. Further investigation is required to maintain these assumptions.
Topics: Animals; Dental Implantation, Endosseous; Dental Implants; Diabetes Mellitus; Humans; Osseointegration; Osteoporosis; Renal Insufficiency, Chronic; Vitamin D; Vitamin D Deficiency; Vitamins
PubMed: 35403929
DOI: 10.1186/s40729-022-00414-6 -
Nutrients Aug 2022Phenolic compounds are natural phytochemicals that have recently reported numerous health benefits. Resveratrol, curcumin, and quercetin have recently received the most...
Phenolic compounds are natural phytochemicals that have recently reported numerous health benefits. Resveratrol, curcumin, and quercetin have recently received the most attention among these molecules due to their documented antioxidant effects. The review aims to investigate the effects of these molecules on bone metabolism and their role in several diseases such as osteopenia and osteoporosis, bone tumours, and periodontitis. The PubMed/Medline, Web of Science, Google Scholar, Scopus, Cochrane Library, and Embase electronic databases were searched for papers in line with the study topic. According to an English language restriction, the screening period was from January 2012 to 3 July 2022, with the following Boolean keywords: ("resveratrol" AND "bone"); ("curcumin" AND "bone"); ("quercetin" AND "bone"). A total of 36 papers were identified as relevant to the purpose of our investigation. The studies reported the positive effects of the investigated phenolic compounds on bone metabolism and their potential application as adjuvant treatments for osteoporosis, bone tumours, and periodontitis. Furthermore, their use on the titanium surfaces of orthopaedic prostheses could represent a possible application to improve the osteogenic processes and osseointegration. According to the study findings, resveratrol, curcumin, and quercetin are reported to have a wide variety of beneficial effects as supplement therapies. The investigated phenolic compounds seem to positively mediate bone metabolism and osteoclast-related pathologies.
Topics: Curcumin; Dietary Supplements; Humans; Osteoporosis; Periodontitis; Quercetin; Resveratrol
PubMed: 36079777
DOI: 10.3390/nu14173519 -
Frontiers in Cellular and Infection... 2021After insertion into the bone, implants osseointegrate, which is required for their long-term success. However, inflammation and infection around the implants may lead... (Review)
Review
INTRODUCTION
After insertion into the bone, implants osseointegrate, which is required for their long-term success. However, inflammation and infection around the implants may lead to implant failure leading to peri-implantitis and loss of supporting bone, which may eventually lead to failure of implant. Surface chemistry of the implant and lack of cleanliness on the part of the patient are related to peri-implantitis. The only way to get rid of this infection is decontamination of dental implants.
OBJECTIVE
This systematic review intended to study decontamination of microbial biofilm methods on titanium implant surfaces used in dentistry.
METHODS
The electronic databases Springer Link, Science Direct, and PubMed were explored from their inception until December 2020 to identify relevant studies. Studies included had to evaluate the efficiency of new strategies either to prevent formation of biofilm or to treat matured biofilm on dental implant surfaces.
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
In this systematic review, 17 different groups of decontamination methods were summarized from 116 studies. The decontamination methods included coating materials, mechanical cleaning, laser treatment, photodynamic therapy, air polishing, anodizing treatment, radiation, sonication, thermal treatment, ultrasound treatment, chemical treatment, electrochemical treatment, antimicrobial drugs, argon treatment, and probiotics.
CONCLUSION
The findings suggest that most of the decontamination methods were effective in preventing the formation of biofilm and in decontaminating established biofilm on dental implants. This narrative review provides a summary of methods for future research in the development of new dental implants and decontamination techniques.
Topics: Anti-Infective Agents; Biofilms; Decontamination; Dental Implants; Humans; Peri-Implantitis
PubMed: 34692562
DOI: 10.3389/fcimb.2021.736186 -
Clinical Oral Investigations Sep 2016The aim of this systematic review was to evaluate the efficacy of different soft tissue augmentation/correction methods in terms of increasing the peri-implant width of... (Review)
Review
OBJECTIVES
The aim of this systematic review was to evaluate the efficacy of different soft tissue augmentation/correction methods in terms of increasing the peri-implant width of keratinized mucosa (KM) and/or gain of soft tissue volume during second-stage surgery.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
Screening of two databases, MEDLINE (PubMed) and EMBASE (OVID), and hand search of related articles, were performed. Human studies reporting on soft tissue augmentation/correction methods around submucosally osseointegrated implants during second-stage surgery up to July 31, 2015 were considered. Quality assessment of the selected full-text articles was performed according to the Cochrane collaboration's tool to assess the risk of bias.
RESULTS
Overall, eight prospective studies (risk of bias: high) and two case series (risk of bias: high) were included. Depending on the surgical technique and graft material used, the enlargement of keratinized tissue (KT) ranged between -0.20 and 9.35 mm. An apically positioned partial-thickness flap/vestibuloplasty (APPTF/VP) in combination with a free gingival graft (FGG) or a xenogeneic graft material (XCM) was most effective. Applying a roll envelope flap (REF) or an APPTF in combination with a subepithelial connective tissue graft (SCTG), mean increases in soft tissue volumes of 2.41 and 3.10 mm, respectively, were achieved. Due to the heterogeneity of study designs, no meta-analysis could be performed.
CONCLUSIONS
Within the limitations of this review, regarding the enlargement of peri-implant KT, the APPTF in the maxilla and the APPTF/VP in combination with FGG or XCM in the lower and upper jaw seem to provide acceptable outcomes. To augment peri-implant soft tissue volume REF in the maxilla or APPTF + SCTG in the lower and upper jaw appear to be reliable treatment options.
CLINICAL RELEVANCE
The localization in the jaw and the clinical situation are crucial for the decision which second-stage procedure should be applied.
Topics: Connective Tissue; Dental Implants; Gingiva; Gingivoplasty; Humans; Jaw, Edentulous, Partially; Surgical Flaps; Vestibuloplasty
PubMed: 27041111
DOI: 10.1007/s00784-016-1815-2 -
BMC Oral Health Jul 2022Implantology represents the gold standard for oral rehabilitation, unfortunately, often, despite there are no local contraindications to this type of rehabilitation,...
OBJECTIVE
Implantology represents the gold standard for oral rehabilitation, unfortunately, often, despite there are no local contraindications to this type of rehabilitation, there are uncertainties regarding the general health of our patients. Many patients nowadays take bisphosphonate drugs, often without first seeking advice from an oral surgeon or a dentist. The purpose of this review is precisely to highlight any contraindications to this type of treatment reported in the literature, in patients who take or have taken bisphosphonate drugs.
METHODS
For this study the scientific information sources were consulted using as search terms "("bisphosphonate AND "dental implant")", obtaining 312 results, these were subsequently skimmed according to the inclusion and exclusion criteria, and further evaluated their relevance to the study and the presence of requested outcomes.
RESULTS
Only 9 manuscripts (RCTs, Multicentric studies and Clinical Trials) were included in this review, as they respected the parameters of this review, they were analyzed and it was possible to draw important results from them. Surely from this study it is understood that the use of bisphosphonate drugs does not represent an absolute contraindication to implant therapy, it is evident how adequate pharmacological prophylaxis, and an adequate protocol reduce the risks regarding implant failures. Furthermore, the values of marginal bone loss over time seem, even if not statistically significant, to be better in implant rehabilitation with bisphosphonate drugs association. Only a few molecules like risedronate, or corticosteroids, or some conditions like smoking or diabetes have shown a high risk of surgical failure.
CONCLUSION
Although this study considered different studies for a total of 378 patients and at least 1687 different dental implants, showing better results in some cases for dental implant therapy in cases of bisphosphonate intake, further clinical, randomized and multicentric studies are needed, with longer follow-ups, to fully clarify this situation which often negatively affects the quality of life of our patients and places clinicians in the face of doubts.
Topics: Dental Implantation, Endosseous; Dental Implants; Dental Restoration Failure; Diphosphonates; Humans; Quality of Life
PubMed: 35843929
DOI: 10.1186/s12903-022-02330-y -
The Journal of Oral Implantology Dec 2016Polyetheretherketone (PEEK) has been suggested as an alternative to replace titanium as a dental implant material. However, PEEK's bioactivity and osseointegration are... (Comparative Study)
Comparative Study Review
Polyetheretherketone (PEEK) has been suggested as an alternative to replace titanium as a dental implant material. However, PEEK's bioactivity and osseointegration are debatable. This review has systematically analyzed studies that have compared PEEK (or PEEK-based) implants with titanium implants so that its feasibility as a possible replacement for titanium can be determined. The focused question was: "Are the bioactivity and osseointegration of PEEK implants comparable to or better than titanium implants?" Using the key words "dental implant," "implant," "polyetheretherketone," "PEEK," and "titanium" in various combinations, the following databases were searched electronically: PubMED/MEDLINE, Embase, Google Scholar, ISI Web of Knowledge, and Cochrane Database. 5 in vitro and 4 animal studies were included in the review. In 4 out of 5 in vitro studies, titanium exhibited more cellular proliferation, angiogenesis, osteoblast maturation, and osteogenesis compared to PEEK; one in vitro study observed comparable outcomes regardless of the implant material. In all animal studies, uncoated and coated titanium exhibited a more osteogenic behavior than did uncoated PEEK, while comparable bone-implant contact was observed in HA-coated PEEK and coated titanium implants. Unmodified PEEK is less osseoconductive and bioactive than titanium. Furthermore, the majority of studies had multiple sources of bias; hence, in its unmodified form, PEEK is unsuitable to be used as dental implant. Significantly more research and long-term trials must focus on improving the bioactivity of PEEK before it can be used as dental implant. More comparative animal and clinical studies are warranted to ascertain the potential of PEEK as a viable alternative to titanium.
Topics: Animals; Benzophenones; Dental Implants; Ketones; Osseointegration; Polyethylene Glycols; Polymers; Titanium
PubMed: 27560166
DOI: 10.1563/aaid-joi-D-16-00072 -
Journal of Dental Research Mar 2012The purpose of this study was to examine the most frequently used criteria to define treatment success in implant dentistry. An electronic MEDLINE/PubMED search was... (Review)
Review
The purpose of this study was to examine the most frequently used criteria to define treatment success in implant dentistry. An electronic MEDLINE/PubMED search was conducted to identify randomized controlled trials and prospective studies reporting on outcomes of implant dentistry. Only studies conducted with roughened surface implants and at least five-year follow-up were included. Data were analyzed for success at the implant level, peri-implant soft tissue, prosthetics, and patient satisfaction. Most frequently reported criteria for success at the implant level were mobility, pain, radiolucency, and peri-implant bone loss (> 1.5 mm), and for success at the peri-implant soft-tissue level, suppuration, and bleeding. The criteria for success at the prosthetic level were the occurrence of technical complications/prosthetic maintenance, adequate function, and esthetics during the five-year period. The criteria at patient satisfaction level were discomfort and paresthesia, satisfaction with appearance, and ability to chew/taste. Success in implant dentistry should ideally evaluate a long-term primary outcome of an implant-prosthetic complex as a whole.
Topics: Benchmarking; Dental Implantation, Endosseous; Dental Prosthesis Design; Dental Prosthesis, Implant-Supported; Humans; Osseointegration; Outcome Assessment, Health Care; Patient Satisfaction
PubMed: 22157097
DOI: 10.1177/0022034511431252 -
The Japanese Dental Science Review Dec 2023The use of graphecs excellent mechanical properties. However, it is necessary to evaluate the biological effects of this material. This systematic review aimed to... (Review)
Review
The use of graphecs excellent mechanical properties. However, it is necessary to evaluate the biological effects of this material. This systematic review aimed to observe and understand through studies the current state of the art regarding osseointegration, antimicrobial capacity, and the cytotoxicity of graphene coating applied to the surface of dental implant materials. Searches in PubMed, Embase, Science Direct, Web of Science, and Google Scholar databases were conducted between June and July 2021 and updated in May 2022 using the keywords: graphene, graphene oxide, dental implants, zirconium, titanium, peek, aluminum, disilicate, methyl-methacrylate, cytotoxicity, osseointegration, and bone regeneration. The criteria included in vivo and in vitro studies that evaluated antimicrobial capacity and/or osseointegration and/or cytotoxicity of dental implant materials coated with graphene compounds. The risk of bias for in vitro studies was assessed by the JBI tool, and for in vivo studies, Syrcle's risk of bias tool for animal studies was used. The database search resulted in 176 articles. Of the 18 articles selected for full reading, 16 remained in this systematic review. The use of graphene compounds as coatings on the surface of implant materials is promising because it promotes osseointegration and has antimicrobial capacity. However, further studies are needed to ensure its cytotoxic potential.
PubMed: 37680613
DOI: 10.1016/j.jdsr.2023.08.005