Methods : Clinical outcomes following surgical treatment of peri-implantitis at grafted and non-grafted implant sites: a retrospective analysis [2]
Peri-implantitis was defined as bleeding on probing (BOP) with or without suppuration (Supp) in addition to changes in the radiographic bone level. Interproximal bone level changes were estimated on intraoral radiographs. In the absence of available baseline radiographs taken at prosthesis installation, “a threshold vertical distance of 2 mm from the expected marginal bone level” was used to assess bone loss [3].
The identified patients with a history of grafting had received the following treatment protocols:
Simultaneous grafting (one stage) of dehiscence-type defects, employing a particulated bone substitute, and collagen membrane (2 patients; 3 implants)
Grafting and staged implant placement at 6 months (two stage) employing a particulated bone substitute and collagen membrane (3 patients; 3 implants)
External grafting (lateral window) employing a particulated bone substitute and collagen membrane and implant placement (2 patients; 3 implants)
External grafting (lateral window) employing a particulated bone substitute and collagen membrane and staged implant placement at 6 months (4 patients; 7 implants)
To be included, the radiographic bone loss at baseline (i.e., prior to treatment) in respective patients had to extend to the formerly grafted area.
After an initial course of non-surgical therapy, each subject had received a combined (i.e., implantoplasty + augmentative therapy) surgical treatment procedure [14] at respective implant sites (Fig. 1). This procedure included open flap debridement and a meticulous granulation tissue removal using conventional plastic curets (Straumann Dental Implant System; Institut Straumann AG, Basel, Switzerland) and an implantoplasty at both buccally (i.e., Classes Ib and Ic) and supracrestally (i.e., class II) (Fig. 1) exposed implant surfaces. This was accomplished using diamond burs (ZR Diamonds; Gebr. Brasseler GmbH & Co. KG, Lemgo, Germany) and Arkansas stones under copious irrigation with sterile saline. The remaining unmodified implant surfaces at the respective intrabony defect areas (i.e., classes Ib, Ic, and Ie) were decontaminated using either an Er:YAG laser device (energy density of 11.4 J/cm2, 10 Hz) (elexxion delos; elexxion AG, Radolfzell, Germany) or debrided using plastic curetes and cotton pellets soaked in sterile saline (Straumann Dental Implant System). Respective intrabony defect compartments were homogeneously filled using NBM (BioOss spongiosa granules, particle size 0.25–1 mm; Geistlich, Wolhusen, Switzerland) and were covered with CM (BioGide; Geistlich). Transmucosal healing was supported by a peri- and postoperative antibiotic medication for 5 days.
Serial posts:
- Abstract : Clinical outcomes following surgical treatment of peri-implantitis at grafted and non-grafted implant sites: a retrospective analysis
- Background : Clinical outcomes following surgical treatment of peri-implantitis at grafted and non-grafted implant sites: a retrospective analysis
- Methods : Clinical outcomes following surgical treatment of peri-implantitis at grafted and non-grafted implant sites: a retrospective analysis [1]
- Methods : Clinical outcomes following surgical treatment of peri-implantitis at grafted and non-grafted implant sites: a retrospective analysis [2]
- Methods : Clinical outcomes following surgical treatment of peri-implantitis at grafted and non-grafted implant sites: a retrospective analysis [3]
- Results : Clinical outcomes following surgical treatment of peri-implantitis at grafted and non-grafted implant sites: a retrospective analysis [1]
- Results : Clinical outcomes following surgical treatment of peri-implantitis at grafted and non-grafted implant sites: a retrospective analysis [2]
- Discussion : Clinical outcomes following surgical treatment of peri-implantitis at grafted and non-grafted implant sites: a retrospective analysis [1]
- Discussion : Clinical outcomes following surgical treatment of peri-implantitis at grafted and non-grafted implant sites: a retrospective analysis [2]
- Conclusions : Clinical outcomes following surgical treatment of peri-implantitis at grafted and non-grafted implant sites: a retrospective analysis
- References : Clinical outcomes following surgical treatment of peri-implantitis at grafted and non-grafted implant sites: a retrospective analysis [1]
- References : Clinical outcomes following surgical treatment of peri-implantitis at grafted and non-grafted implant sites: a retrospective analysis [2]
- References : Clinical outcomes following surgical treatment of peri-implantitis at grafted and non-grafted implant sites: a retrospective analysis [3]
- Funding : Clinical outcomes following surgical treatment of peri-implantitis at grafted and non-grafted implant sites: a retrospective analysis
- Author information : Clinical outcomes following surgical treatment of peri-implantitis at grafted and non-grafted implant sites: a retrospective analysis
- Ethics declarations : Clinical outcomes following surgical treatment of peri-implantitis at grafted and non-grafted implant sites: a retrospective analysis
- Rights and permissions : Clinical outcomes following surgical treatment of peri-implantitis at grafted and non-grafted implant sites: a retrospective analysis
- About this article : Clinical outcomes following surgical treatment of peri-implantitis at grafted and non-grafted implant sites: a retrospective analysis
- Table 1 Implant site characteristics : Clinical outcomes following surgical treatment of peri-implantitis at grafted and non-grafted implant sites: a retrospective analysis
- Table 2 Disease resolution between the non-grafted and grafted implant sites : Clinical outcomes following surgical treatment of peri-implantitis at grafted and non-grafted implant sites: a retrospective analysis
- Table 3 Reduction of mean BOP (%) : Clinical outcomes following surgical treatment of peri-implantitis at grafted and non-grafted implant sites: a retrospective analysis
- Table 4 Reduction of maximum PD (mm) : Clinical outcomes following surgical treatment of peri-implantitis at grafted and non-grafted implant sites: a retrospective analysis
- Fig. 1. Combined surgical therapy of peri-implantitis at respective defect sites: class I: intrabony component showing either a buccal dehiscency with a semicircular component (Ib) or a buccal dehiscency with a cicumferential component (Ic). Class II: supracrestal component. The red rectangles indicate the surface areas undergoing an implantoplasty, while the green areas indicate the defect areas undergoing augmentative therapy : Clinical outcomes following surgical treatment of peri-implant
- Fig. 2. Box plot depicting no significant differences of the baseline maximum PD values between the grafted and non-grafted patient groups (p = 0.353) : Clinical outcomes following surgical treatment of peri-implant
- Fig. 3. Dumbbell—dot plots illustrating (a) disease resolution and no resolution at non-grafted and grafted sites at the patient level analysis with no significant difference between the two groups (p = 0.579). Patents with improvement, deterioration, and no improvement following the treatment based on the max PD changes are depicted; (b) disease resolution and no resolution at the implants in non-grafted and grafted sites. Significantly higher disease resolution in the grafted implant group (p = 0.048) : Clinical outcomes following surgical treatment of peri-implant
- Fig. 4. Box plot presenting mean BOP reduction between the two patient groups (grafted and non-grafted) with no significant difference (p = 0.778) : Clinical outcomes following surgical treatment of peri-implant
- Fig. 5. Box plot illustrating maximum PD reduction between the grafted and non-grafted patient groups that did not reach a significant difference (p = 0.968) : Clinical outcomes following surgical treatment of peri-implant