-
Journal of Periodontal Research Apr 2020Peri-implantitis is an inflammatory disease of hard and soft tissues around osseointegrated implants, followed by a progressive damage of alveolar bone. Oral... (Review)
Review
Peri-implantitis is an inflammatory disease of hard and soft tissues around osseointegrated implants, followed by a progressive damage of alveolar bone. Oral microorganisms can adhere to all types of surfaces by the production of multiple adhesive factors. Inherent properties of materials will influence not only the number of microorganisms, but also their profile and adhesion force onto the material surface. In this perspective, strategies to reduce the adhesion of pathogenic microorganisms on dental implants and their components should be investigated in modern rehabilitation concepts in implant dentistry. To date, several metallic nanoparticle films have been developed to reduce the growth of pathogenic bacteria. However, the main drawback in these approaches is the potential toxicity and accumulative effect of the metals over time. In view of biological issues and in attempt to prevent and/or treat peri-implantitis, biomaterials as carriers of antimicrobial substances have attracted special attention for application as coatings on dental implant devices. This review will focus on biomaterial-based possibilities to prevent and/or treat peri-implantitis by describing concepts and dental implant components suitable for engagement in preventing and treating this disease. Additionally, we raise important criteria referring to the geometric parameters of dental implants and their components, which can directly affect peri-implant tissue conditions. Finally, we overview currently available biomaterial systems that can be used in the field of oral implantology.
Topics: Anti-Infective Agents; Bacterial Adhesion; Biocompatible Materials; Dental Implants; Humans; Peri-Implantitis
PubMed: 31638267
DOI: 10.1111/jre.12707 -
Journal of Periodontology Oct 2019The incidence of a peri-implant soft tissue dehiscence/deficiency (PSTD) is not a rare finding. Despite multiple previous attempts aimed at correcting the PSTDs, a...
BACKGROUND
The incidence of a peri-implant soft tissue dehiscence/deficiency (PSTD) is not a rare finding. Despite multiple previous attempts aimed at correcting the PSTDs, a classification of these conditions has not yet been proposed. This lack in the literature may also lead to discrepancies in the reported treatment outcomes and thus misinform the clinician or the readers. The aim of the present article was therefore to present a classification of peri-implant PSTD at a single implant site.
METHODS
Four classes of PSTDs were discussed based on the position of the gingival margin of the implant-supported crown in relation to the homologous natural tooth. In addition, the bucco-lingual position of the implant head was also taken into consideration. Each class was further subdivided based on the height of the anatomical papillae.
RESULTS
Subsequently, for each respective category a surgical approach (including bilaminar techniques, the combined prosthetic-surgical approach or soft tissue augmentation with a submerged healing) was also suggested.
CONCLUSION
This paper provides a new classification system for describing PSTDs at single implant sites, with the appropriate recommended treatment protocol.
Topics: Crowns; Dental Implantation, Endosseous; Dental Implants, Single-Tooth; Dental Prosthesis, Implant-Supported; Esthetics, Dental; Tooth Crown; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 31087334
DOI: 10.1002/JPER.18-0616 -
Hua Xi Kou Qiang Yi Xue Za Zhi = Huaxi... Apr 2019Titanium dental implants have wide clinical application due to their many advantages, including comfort, aesthetics, lack of damage to adjacent teeth, and significant... (Review)
Review
Titanium dental implants have wide clinical application due to their many advantages, including comfort, aesthetics, lack of damage to adjacent teeth, and significant clinical effects. However, the failure of osseointegration, bone resorption, and peri-implantitis limits their application. Physical-chemical and bioactive coatings on the surface of titanium implants could improve the successful rate of dental implants and meet the clinical application requirements. This paper reviews the characteristics of surface modification of titanium implants from the aspects of physics, chemistry, and biology. Results provide information for research and clinical application of dental implant materials.
Topics: Coated Materials, Biocompatible; Dental Implants; Esthetics, Dental; Osseointegration; Surface Properties; Titanium
PubMed: 31168977
DOI: 10.7518/hxkq.2019.02.002 -
Journal of Prosthodontic Research Jan 2022Dental implant therapy is a common clinical treatment for missing teeth. However, the esthetic result is not as satisfactory as expected in some cases, especially in the...
PURPOSE
Dental implant therapy is a common clinical treatment for missing teeth. However, the esthetic result is not as satisfactory as expected in some cases, especially in the anterior maxillary area. Poor esthetic results are caused by inadequate preparation of the hard and soft tissues in this area before treatment. The socket shield technique may be an alternative for a desirable esthetic outcome in dental implant treatments.
STUDY SELECTION
In the present systematic review, PubMed-Medline, Google Scholar, and ScienceDirect were searched for clinical studies published from January 2000 to December 2018.
RESULTS
Twenty studies were included, comprising one randomized controlled trial, two cohort studies, 14 clinical human case reports, and three retrospective case series. In total, 288 patients treated with the socket shield technique with immediate implant placement and follow-up between 3-60 months after placement were included. A quality assessment showed that 12 of the 20 included studies were of good quality. Twenty-six of the 274 (9.5%) cases developed complications or adverse effects related to the socket shield technique. Most studies reported implant survival without the complications (90.5%); most of the cases that were followed up for more than 12 months after implant placement achieved a good esthetic appearance. The failure rate was low without the complications, although there were some failures due to failed implant osseointegration, socket shield mobility and infection, socket shield exposure, socket shield migration, and apical root resorption.
CONCLUSIONS
The socket shield technique can be used in dental implant treatment, but it remains difficult to predict the long-term success of this technique until high-quality evidence becomes available.
Topics: Dental Implantation, Endosseous; Dental Implants; Dental Implants, Single-Tooth; Esthetics, Dental; Humans; Immediate Dental Implant Loading; Retrospective Studies; Tooth Extraction; Tooth Socket; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 33692284
DOI: 10.2186/jpr.JPR_D_20_00054 -
International Journal of Implant... Nov 2021To evaluate the efficacy of alternative or adjunctive measures to conventional non-surgical or surgical treatment of peri-implant mucositis and peri-implantitis. (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
Efficacy of alternative or adjunctive measures to conventional non-surgical and surgical treatment of peri-implant mucositis and peri-implantitis: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
PURPOSE
To evaluate the efficacy of alternative or adjunctive measures to conventional non-surgical or surgical treatment of peri-implant mucositis and peri-implantitis.
MATERIAL AND METHODS
Prospective randomized and nonrandomized controlled studies comparing alternative or adjunctive measures, and reporting on changes in bleeding scores (i.e., bleed0ing index (BI) or bleeding on probing (BOP)), probing depth (PD) values or suppuration (SUPP) were searched.
RESULTS
Peri-implant mucositis: adjunctive use of local antiseptics lead to greater PD reduction (weighted mean difference (WMD) = - 0.23 mm; p = 0.03, respectively), whereas changes in BOP were comparable (WMD = - 5.30%; p = 0.29). Non-surgical treatment of peri-implantitis: alternative measures for biofilm removal and systemic antibiotics yielded higher BOP reduction (WMD = - 28.09%; p = 0.01 and WMD = - 17.35%; p = 0.01, respectively). Surgical non-reconstructive peri-implantitis treatment: WMD in PD amounted to - 1.11 mm favoring adjunctive implantoplasty (p = 0.02). Adjunctive reconstructive measures lead to significantly higher radiographic bone defect fill/reduction (WMD = 56.46%; p = 0.01 and WMD = - 1.47 mm; p = 0.01), PD (- 0.51 mm; p = 0.01) and lower soft-tissue recession (WMD = - 0.63 mm; p = 0.01), while changes in BOP were not significant (WMD = - 11.11%; p = 0.11).
CONCLUSIONS
Alternative and adjunctive measures provided no beneficial effect in resolving peri-implant mucositis, while alternative measures were superior in reducing BOP values following non-surgical treatment of peri-implantitis. Adjunctive reconstructive measures were beneficial regarding radiographic bone-defect fill/reduction, PD reduction and lower soft-tissue recession, although they did not improve the resolution of mucosal inflammation.
Topics: Anti-Infective Agents, Local; Dental Implants; Humans; Mucositis; Peri-Implantitis; Prospective Studies
PubMed: 34779939
DOI: 10.1186/s40729-021-00388-x -
International Journal of Implant... Jul 2023The macrogeometry of a dental implant plays a decisive role in its primary stability. A larger diameter, a conical shape, and a roughened surface increase the contact... (Review)
Review
PURPOSE
The macrogeometry of a dental implant plays a decisive role in its primary stability. A larger diameter, a conical shape, and a roughened surface increase the contact area of the implant with the surrounding bone and thus improve primary stability. This is considered the basis for successful implant osseointegration that different factors, such as implant design, can influence. This narrative review aims to critically review macro-geometric features affecting the primary stability of dental implants.
METHODS
For this review, a comprehensive literature search and review of relevant studies was conducted based on formulating a research question, searching the literature using keywords and electronic databases such as PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library to search for relevant studies. These studies were screened and selected, the study quality was assessed, data were extracted, the results were summarized, and conclusions were drawn.
RESULTS
The macrogeometry of a dental implant includes its surface characteristics, size, and shape, all of which play a critical role in its primary stability. At the time of placement, the initial stability of an implant is determined by its contact area with the surrounding bone. Larger diameter and a conical shape of an implant result in a larger contact area and better primary stability. But the linear relationship between implant length and primary stability ends at 12 mm.
CONCLUSIONS
Several factors must be considered when choosing the ideal implant geometry, including local factors such as the condition of the bone and soft tissues at the implant site and systemic and patient-specific factors such as osteoporosis, diabetes, or autoimmune diseases. These factors can affect the success of the implant procedure and the long-term stability of an implant. By considering these factors, the surgeon can ensure the greatest possible therapeutic success and minimize the risk of implant failure.
Topics: Humans; Dental Implants; Dental Implantation, Endosseous; Osseointegration; Dental Prosthesis Design; Surgeons
PubMed: 37405709
DOI: 10.1186/s40729-023-00485-z -
Hua Xi Kou Qiang Yi Xue Za Zhi = Huaxi... Feb 2017The development of clinical implant dentistry was intensively affected by dental implant design improvement and innovation, which brought about new concept, even...
The development of clinical implant dentistry was intensively affected by dental implant design improvement and innovation, which brought about new concept, even milestone-like changes of clinical protocol. The current improvements of dental implant design and their clinical importance could be highlighted as followings: 1) The implant apical design influences the implant preliminary stability in immediate implant. The apical 3-5 mm design of implant makes implant stable in immediate implant, because this part would be screwed into alveolar bone through fresh socket, the other part of implant could not be tightly screwed in the socket because of smaller implant diameter. Implant apical form, screw design, self-taping of apical part would be essential for immediate implant. 2) The enough preliminary stability of implant makes immediate prosthesis possible. When osseointegration does not occur, the implant stability comes from a mechanical anchorage, which depends on implant form, screw thread and self-taping design. 3) Implant neck design may have influence for soft tissue recession in esthetic zone. The implant with large shoulder would not be selected for the esthetic area. The platform design may be more favorable in the area. 4) The connection design between implant and abutment is thought a very important structure in implant long-term stability. Moose taper and "tube in tube" were well documented structure design in 20-year clinical practice in Peking University. 5) In last 15 years, the plenty studies showed the platform design of implant had positive influence in implant marginal bone level. Whatever in single implant restoration or multi-implant prosthesis. 6) The digital technology makes clinical work more precise and high-tech. This would be a trend in implant dentistry. New generation of chair-side digital computer-aided design/computer-aided manufacturing makes immediate prosthesis without conventional impression possible. 7) New abutment design have changed clinical protocol greatly. The All-on-four concept and Weldone concept benefit both from the abutment innovation, which were large angulated abutment and special welding abutment materials.
Topics: Computer-Aided Design; Dental Implants; Dental Prosthesis Design; Humans; Osseointegration
PubMed: 28326723
DOI: 10.7518/hxkq.2017.01.003 -
Journal of Translational Medicine Sep 2022In the last decades, the ortho-aesthetic-functional rehabilitation had significant advances with the advent of implantology. Despite the success in implantology... (Review)
Review
In the last decades, the ortho-aesthetic-functional rehabilitation had significant advances with the advent of implantology. Despite the success in implantology surgeries, there is a percentage of failures mainly due to in loco infections, through bacterial proliferation, presence of fungi and biofilm formation, originating peri-implantitis. In this sense, several studies have been conducted since then, seeking answers to numerous questions that remain unknown. Thus, the present work aims to discuss the interaction between host-oral microbiome and the development of peri-implantitis. Peri-implantitis was associated with a diversity of bacterial species, being Porphiromonas gingivalis, Treponema denticola and Tannerella forsythia described in higher proportion of peri-implantitis samples. In a parallel role, the injury of peri-implant tissue causes an inflammatory response mediated by activation of innate immune cells such as macrophages, dendritic cells, mast cells, and neutrophils. In summary, the host immune system activation may lead to imbalance of oral microbiota, and, in turn, the oral microbiota dysbiosis is reported leading to cytokines, chemokines, prostaglandins, and proteolytic enzymes production. These biological processes may be responsible for implant loss.
Topics: Cytokines; Dental Implants; Humans; Microbiota; Peptide Hydrolases; Peri-Implantitis; Porphyromonas gingivalis; Prostaglandins
PubMed: 36138430
DOI: 10.1186/s12967-022-03636-9 -
International Journal of Environmental... Feb 2022The aim of this systematic review was to evaluate the in vitro accuracy of dental implants impressions taken with intraoral scanner compared with impressions taken with... (Review)
Review
The aim of this systematic review was to evaluate the in vitro accuracy of dental implants impressions taken with intraoral scanner compared with impressions taken with conventional techniques. Two independent reviewers conducted a systematic electronic search in the PubMed, Web of Science and Scopus databases. Some of the employed key terms, combined with the help of Boolean operators, were: "dental implants", "impression accuracy", "digital impression" and "conventional impression". Publication dates ranged from the earliest article available until 31 July 2021. A total of 26 articles fulfilled the inclusion criteria: 14 studies simulated complete edentation (CE), nine partial edentation (PE) and only two simulated a single implant (SI); One study simulated both CE and SI. In cases of PE and SI, most of the studies analyzed found greater accuracy with conventional impression (CI), although digital impression (DI) was also considered adequate. For CE the findings were inconclusive as six studies found greater accuracy with DI, five found better accuracy with CI and four found no differences. According to the results of this systematic review, DI is a valid alternative to CI for implants in PE and SI, although CI appear to be more accurate. For CE the findings were inconclusive, so more studies are needed before DI can be recommended for all implant-supported restorations.
Topics: Computer-Aided Design; Databases, Factual; Dental Implants; Dental Impression Technique; Models, Dental
PubMed: 35206217
DOI: 10.3390/ijerph19042026 -
Journal of Dental Research Dec 2018Dental implants have become an increasingly popular treatment choice for replacing missing teeth. Yet, little is known about the prevalence and sociodemographic...
Dental implants have become an increasingly popular treatment choice for replacing missing teeth. Yet, little is known about the prevalence and sociodemographic distribution of dental implant use in the United States. To address this knowledge gap, we analyzed data from 7 National Health and Nutrition Examination Surveys from 1999 to 2016. We estimated dental implant prevalence among adults missing any teeth for each survey period overall as stratified by sociodemographic characteristics. We calculated absolute and relative differences from 1999-2000 to 2015-2016 and fit logistic regression models to estimate changes over time. We also used multivariable logistic regression to estimate independent associations of sociodemographic covariates with the presence of any implant. We projected the proportion of patients treated with dental implants into the year 2026 under varying assumptions of how the temporal trend would continue. There has been a large increase in the prevalence of dental implants, from 0.7% in 1999 to 2000 to 5.7% in 2015 to 2016. The largest absolute increase in prevalence (12.9%) was among individuals 65 to 74 y old, whereas the largest relative increase was ~1,000% among those 55 to 64 y old. There was an average covariate-adjusted increase in dental implant prevalence of 14% per year (95% CI, 11% to 18%). Having private insurance (vs. none or public insurance) or more than a high school education (vs. high school or less) was each associated with a 2-fold increase in prevalence, with an almost 13-fold (95% CI, 8 to21) increase for older adults. Dental implant prevalence projected to 2026 ranged from 5.7% in the most conservative scenario to 23% in the least. This study demonstrates that dental implant prevalence among US adults with missing teeth has substantially increased since 1999. Yet access overall is still very low, and prevalence was consistently higher among more advantaged groups.
Topics: Adult; Aged; Aged, 80 and over; Cross-Sectional Studies; Dental Implantation, Endosseous; Dental Implants; Female; History, 20th Century; History, 21st Century; Humans; Male; Middle Aged; Nutrition Surveys; Prevalence; Socioeconomic Factors; United States
PubMed: 30075090
DOI: 10.1177/0022034518792567