Background: Currently, information available on the exact prevalence and standard therapeutic protocol of peri-implant diseases is insufficient. The aim of this survey was to investigate the perceived prevalence, etiology, and management of peri-implant mucositis and peri-implantitis by periodontists in the United States.
Methods: A twenty-question survey was developed. Periodontists currently practicing in the United States were contacted by an e-mail that contained a link to access the survey.
Results: Two hundred eighty periodontists (79.3% males; 62.9% with >10 years in practice, 75.7% in private practice) completed the survey. Most (96.1%) of the participants were placing implants (58.3% for >10 years and 32.4% >150 implants/year). The majority reported that the prevalence of peri-implant mucositis and peri-implantitis in their practices is up to 25% but is higher in the general US population and that up to 10% of implants must be removed due to peri-implantitis. There was agreement among contributing etiologic factors such as: 1) plaque; 2) smoking; 3) adverse loading; 4) oral hygiene; 5) use of antimicrobial gel/mouthrinse; 6) non-surgical debridement; 7) use of systemic antibiotics; and 8) 3-month supportive care for treatment of peri-implantitis. Significant heterogeneity was recorded in relation to the instruments used for debridement, use and type of surgical treatment, and materials used for regeneration. Only 5.1% believed that treatment is very effective.
Conclusions: This survey indicates that peri-implant diseases are a frequently encountered problem in periodontal practices and that the absence of a standard therapeutic protocol results in significant empirical use of therapeutic modalities and a moderately effective treatment outcome.
Download full-text PDF |
Source |
---|---|
http://dx.doi.org/10.1902/jop.2015.150476 | DOI Listing |
Clin Implant Dent Relat Res
February 2025
Department of Dental Medicine, Division of Pediatric Dentistry, Karolinska Institutet, Huddinge, Sweden.
Objective: This cross-sectional study aimed to investigate the salivary profile of inflammatory mediators in individuals with periodontal and peri-implant disease as compared to individuals with periodontal and peri-implant health.
Materials And Methods: Saliva samples were collected from 155 participants (mean age 63.3 ± 11.
Cureus
January 2025
Department of Preventive Dental Sciences, College of Dentistry, Najran University, Najran, SAU.
Aim And Background: The success of dental implants is contingent upon various biological conditions, and any lapse in meeting these criteria can lead to complications such as peri-implantitis or implant failure. The objective of this research is to evaluate the level of understanding regarding peri-implant among general dentists practicing in Saudi Arabia.
Materials And Methods: A quantitative approach was employed, utilizing an online questionnaire distributed to general dental practitioners (GDPs) in Saudi Arabia.
Clin Oral Implants Res
January 2025
Unit of Periodontology, Department of Neuroscience, Reproductive Science and Oral Science, University of Naples Federico II, Naples, Italy.
Objectives: To evaluate the treatment of peri-implant mucositis (PM) using a nonsurgical submarginal peri-implant instrumentation (NSPI) with or without chlorhexidine (CHX) solutions.
Methods: Fifty-six patients (28 per group) were randomly assigned to the test (NSPI + 0.12% mouthwash and subgingival CHX irrigation plus tongue brushing with 1% CHX gel) or the control group (NSPI + placebo mouthwash and subgingival placebo irrigation plus tongue brushing with placebo gel).
J Oral Biosci
January 2025
Department of Applied Prosthodontics, Graduate School of Biomedical Sciences, Nagasaki University, Nagasaki 852-8588, Japan. Electronic address:
Objectives: This study investigated the effects of thread design on the soft and hard tissues around implants in rat maxillary peri-implantitis-like lesions.
Methods: Fourteen, 9-week-old, female Wistar rats were used in this study. Two types of grade IV titanium tissue-level implants with a standard V-shape and buttress threads were prepared (control and test implants, respectively).
J Clin Med
January 2025
Department of Periodontology and Oral Mucosa Diseases, Medical University of Warsaw, Binieckiego 6 St., 02-097 Warsaw, Poland.
: The aim of the present narrative review is to synthesize the available scientific evidence on the effects of submarginal instrumentation with periodontal endoscopy and evaluate its' potential efficacy in terms of the non-surgical therapy of peri-implantitis. : The literature search was performed via electronic databases, including PubMed, Web of Science, Cochrane, and Scopus, and was supplemented by manual searching. A literature review was conducted addressing the following PICOS questions: (1) What is the efficacy of non-surgical submarginal instrumentation of the implant surface with the aid of a periodontal endoscope in patients with peri-implantitis? (2) What is the efficacy of non-surgical subgingival instrumentation performed with the aid of a periodontal endoscope compared with conventional subgingival instrumentation in patients with periodontitis, in terms of clinical parameters and patient-reported outcomes? Mechanical decontamination of the implant surface is crucial for resolving inflammation and arresting further bone loss.
View Article and Find Full Text PDFEnter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!