Search

OBJECTIVES To assess, retrospectively, whether older age has an impact on implant osseointegration when compared with younger age. METHODS All patients ≥65 years old at implant installation, in an university setting over a time-period of 11.5 years, with complete anamnestic data and follow-up until prosthetic restoration were included, and any early implant loss (EIL; i.e. lack of osseointegration prior to or at the time-point of prosthetic restoration) was recorded. Further, one implant, from each of the elderly patients, was attempted matched to one implant in a younger patient (35 to

Aim To compare the clinical performance and marginal bone levels of implants restored with platform‐switching (PS) or platform‐matching (PM) abutments. Materials and Methods Adult patients missing two or more adjacent teeth in the posterior mandible received 2–4 CAMLOG SCREW‐LINE implants and were randomly allocated to the PM or PS group, receiving the corresponding prosthetic components from surgery onwards. Implants were conventionally loaded with single cemented crowns. Patients were followed annually for 5 years. Outcome measures were marginal bone level changes, implant survival, performance of the prosthetic components and clinical parameters plaque index, sulcus bleeding index and pocket probing depth. Results Thirty‐three patients received 72 implants in the PM group, and thirty‐five patients received 74 implants in the PS group. Sixty patients attended the final appointment, 31 had received PS components and 29 had received PM components with 65 and 63 implants, respectively. Global survival rate was 96.6% with no differences between groups (p = 0.647). After 5 years of functional loading, PS restored implants presented 0.23mm (95% CI: [0.03, 0.43], p = 0.025) lower marginal bone level changes. The two groups were declared non‐equivalent. Conclusion Patients requiring implant supported restorations in healed bounded or free end edentulous gaps of the mandible benefit from the use of PS components in terms of peri‐implant marginal bone level maintenance, though it may not be clinically noticeable.

Background Resolution and prevention of peri‐implant mucositis are a key in preventing peri‐implantitis. This case–control study aims to assess the modifying effect of a deep mucosal tunnel (DMT) on the induction and resolution phases of experimental peri‐implant mucositis. Methods Nineteen subjects with a tissue level implant were assigned to cases (DMT, depth ≥3 mm) or controls (shallow mucosal tunnel ≤1 mm, SMT). Subjects underwent a standard experimental peri‐implant mucositis protocol characterized by an oral hygiene optimization phase, a 3‐week induction phase using an acrylic stent to prevent self‐performed oral hygiene at the experimental implant, and a 3 + 2 weeks resolution phase. Modified plaque (mPI), gingival index (mGI) and peri‐implant sulcus fluid IL‐1β concentrations were measured over time. Differences between DMT and SMT were assessed with the Mann–Whitney test. Results Modified plaque index and mGI increased in parallel during the induction phase. After resumption of oral hygiene practice, mPI and mGI resolved towards baseline values in the SMT group. In DMT, mPI and mGI values diverged: plaque resolved but resolution of inflammation was delayed and of smaller magnitude during the first 3 weeks after resumption of oral hygiene. IL‐1β concentrations were significantly higher in DMT at 21 days (end of induction) and during the resolution phase corroborating the clinical findings. Removal of the crown and submucosal professional cleaning were needed to revert mGI to baseline values in DMT implants. Conclusions The depth of the mucosal tunnel modifies the resolution of experimental peri‐implant mucositis at transmucosal implants. This observation raises important questions on the effectiveness of self‐performed oral hygiene in cases where implants are placed deeper and the ability to resolve mucositis and effectively prevent peri‐implantitis in such situations.

Aim To compare marginal bone level changes around immediately placed and immediately provisionalized implants with immediately placed and delayed provisionalized implants in the aesthetic region after five years of function. Materials and Methods Forty patients with a failing tooth in the maxillary anterior region were randomly assigned immediate implant placement with immediate (Group A: n = 20) or delayed (Group B: n = 20) provisionalization. Definitive crown placement occurred three months after provisionalization. The primary outcomes were changes in marginal bone level. In addition, survival rates, buccal bone thickness, soft peri‐implant tissues, aesthetics and patient‐reported outcomes were assessed. Results After 5 years, the mean mesial and distal marginal bone level changes were 0.71 ± 0.68 mm and 0.71 ± 0.71 mm, respectively, in group A and 0.49 ± 0.52 mm and 0.54 ± 0.64 mm, respectively, in group B; the difference between the groups was not significant (p = .305 and p = .477, respectively). Implant and restoration survivals were 100%. No clinically relevant differences in buccal bone thickness or in mid‐facial peri‐implant mucosal level, aesthetic and patient outcomes were observed. Conclusions The mean marginal bone level changes following immediate implant placement and provisionalization were comparable with immediate implant placement and delayed provisionalization. (www.isrctn.com: ISRCTN57251089 and www.trialregister.nl: NL8255).

Diabetes represents a challenge in implant therapy because hyperglycemia may negatively affect bone regeneration, directly compromising clinical outcomes and increasing clinical failures. The aim of this retrospective study is to analyse the prognostic significance of HbA1c levels in patients undergoing implant placement associated with horizontal guided bone regeneration. Thirty-four patients were divided into 3 groups according to their HbA1c levels: nondiabetic normoglycemic patients ( HbA 1 c < 5.7 % ), nondiabetic hyperglycemic patients ( HbA 1 c < 6.5 % ), and controlled diabetic patients ( HbA 1 c < 7 % ). Primary outcomes were dimensional changes in height (VDH) and width (DW) of the peri-implant defect. Secondary outcomes were evaluations of periodontal parameters of adjacent tooth sites, wound healing, marginal bone loss (MBL), and survival and success rates. At T 1 (6 months), mean VDH values in groups 1, 2, and 3 were, respectively, 0.07, 0.5, and 0.25 mm. Mean DW values in those same groups were, respectively, 0.07, 0.38, and 0.33 mm. HbA1c levels were not statistically related to VDH and DW values at T 1 . No statistically significant differences were observed in MBL between groups ( p = 0.230 ). Implant survival and success rates were, respectively, 98% and 96%. Simultaneous guided bone regeneration is a feasible procedure for the treatment of horizontal bone deficiencies in controlled diabetic patients.

OBJECTIVE To assess the impact of platelet-rich fibrin (PRF) on implant dentistry. The primary focused question was as follows: What are the clinical, histological, and radiographic outcomes of PRF administration for bone regeneration and implant therapy? METHOD A systematic literature search comprised three databases: MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane followed by a hand search of relevant scientific journals. Human studies using PRF for bone regeneration and implant therapy were considered and articles published up to December 31, 2017 were included. Eligible studies were selected based on the inclusion criteria. Randomized controlled trials (RCT) and controlled clinical trials (CCT) were included. RESULTS In total, 5,963 titles were identified with the search terms and by hand search. A total of 12 randomized controlled trials (RCT) met the inclusion criteria and were chosen for data extraction. Included studies focused on alveolar ridge preservation after tooth extraction, osseointegration process, soft tissue management, bone augmentation, bone regeneration after sinus floor elevation and surgical peri-implantitis treatment. Overall, the risk of bias was moderate or unclear. Nine studies showed superior outcomes for PRF for any of the evaluated variables, such as ridge dimension, bone regeneration, osseointegration process, soft tissue healing. Three studies failed to show any beneficial effects of PRF. No meta-analysis could be performed due to the heterogeneity of study designs. CONCLUSIONS There is moderate evidence supporting the clinical benefit of PRF on ridge preservation and in the early phase of osseointegration. It remains unclear whether PRF can reduce pain and improve soft tissue healing. More research support is necessary to comment on the role of PRF to improve other implant therapy outcomes.

OBJECTIVES: The task of this working group was to update the knowledge about the use of drugs and biologicals affecting healing of soft tissue and bone during implant treatment or procedures associated with it. Moreover, the impact of titanium particles and biocorrosion on complications and implant survival has been analysed. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The literature in the areas of interest (platelet concentrates, antiresorptive drugs as well as implant-host interaction) was screened using systematic reviews for the former two areas, whereas a narrative critical review was performed for the latter topic. Two manuscripts on platelet concentrates, one manuscript on antiresorptive drugs and one manuscript on the effects of biocorrosion, were presented for group analysis with subsequent discussion in the plenum and final consensus approval. RESULTS: Results and conclusions of the individual reviews of the three topics are presented in the respective papers. Conclusions of the group on strengths and weaknesses of available evidence as well as consensus statements and directions for further research are provided in this study. The following papers were subject to group discussions and formed the basis for the consensus statements: Stähli A, Strauss FJ, Gruber R. () The use of platelet-rich-plasma to enhance the outcomes of implant-related therapies: a systematic review Strauss FJ, Stähli A, Gruber R. (2018) The use of platelet-rich-fibrin to enhance the outcomes of implant-related therapies: a systematic review Mombelli A, Hashim D, Cionca N. () What is the impact of titanium particles and bio-corrosion on implant survival and complications? A critical review Stavropoulos A, Bertl K, Pietschmann P, Pandis N, Morten Schiødt, Klinge B. () The effect of antiresorptive drugs on implant therapy: a systematic review. ispartof: CLINICAL ORAL IMPLANTS RESEARCH vol:29 pages:93-99 ispartof: location:SWITZERLAND, Pfaffikon status: published

Aim To analyse the effect of Leucocyte- and Platelet Rich Fibrin (L-PRF) on bone regeneration procedures and osseointegration. Materials and Methods An electronic and hand search was conducted in three databases (MEDLINE, EMBASE and Cochrane). Only randomised clinical trials, written in English where L-PRF was applied in bone regeneration and implant procedures, were selected. No follow-up restrictions were applied. Results A total of 14 articles were included and processed. Three subgroups were created depending on the application: sinus floor elevation (SFE), alveolar ridge preservation, and implant therapy. In SFE, for a lateral window as well as for the trans-alveolar technique, histologically faster bone healing was reported when L-PRF was added to most common xenografts. L-PRF alone improved the preservation of the alveolar width, resulting in less buccal bone resorption compared to natural healing. In implant therapy, better implant stability over time and less marginal bone loss were observed when L-PRF was applied. Meta-analyses could not be performed due to the heterogeneity of the data. Conclusions Despite the lack of strong evidence found in this systematic review, L-PRF might have a positive effect on bone regeneration and osseointegration. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.

Objective: To compare a four-and six-implant maxillary overdenture after an observation period of 5 years.Material and methods: Fifty subjects with functional problems concerning their maxillary denture, who had ample bone volume in the anterior region to place four or six implants, were included and randomly assigned to either group. Implant and overdenture survival, clinical performance, marginal bone loss and patient satisfaction were assessed.Results: Forty-six patients completed the 5-year follow-up. One implant failed in the six implants group (99.2% survival) and none in the four implants group (100% survival). No overdentures had to be replaced during the observation period and the number of complications was limited. Clinical function was good, with no difference in clinical parameters between the groups. Mean marginal bone resorption was 0.50 +/- 0.37 and 0.52 +/- 0.43 mmin the four and six implant group respectively.Conclusion: In patients with functional complaints of their maxillary denture, bar-supported overdentures on four implants in the anterior maxillary region were not inferior to overdentures supported by six implants after 5 years of function. Implant survival and patient satisfaction were high, clinical parameters favourable, bone loss and complications to the denture were minor in both groups (Clinical trial registration number: NTR2969).

Treatment of complex perioprosthetic cases is one of the clinical challenges of everyday practice. Only a complete and thorough diagnostic setup may allow the clinician to formulate a realistic prognosis to select the abutments to support prosthetic rehabilitation. Clinical, radiographic, or laboratory parameters used separately are useless to correctly assign a reliable prognosis to single teeth except in the case of a clearly hopeless tooth. Therefore, it is crucial to gather the greatest quantity of data to determine the role that every single element can play in the prosthetic rehabilitation of the case. The following report deals with the management of a multidisciplinary periodontally compromised case in which a treatment strategy and chronology were designed to reach clinical predictability while reducing the duration of the therapy.

Bone fragility and skeletal irregularities are the characteristic features of osteogenesis imperfecta (OI). Many patients with OI have weakened maxillary and mandibular bone, leading to poor oral hygiene and subsequent loss of teeth. Improvements in implant therapy have allowed for OI patients to achieve dental restoration. However, there is limited available literature on implant therapy for patients with OI. The greatest challenge in the restoration process for OI patients in an outpatient setting is ensuring primary stability and osseointegration. Improvements in synthetic grafts improve successful implant placement and prevent predisposing patients to unnecessary procedures. This report details the successful restoration process of an OI type I patient’s maxillary arch in addition to a review of the currently available literature.

This article analyses published prior article regarding the questions: is the study setup correct (true) and if comparable cases are evaluated for the compared methods. Futhermore the content, the pictures, the tables, the graphs and the pictures legends of the article and statistics are analysed for truth, relevance and applicability. We investigate furthermore if this article addresses all relevant questions regarding bias, the study groups, the evaluation of the outcomes and the evaluation of patient parameters such as burden of the treatment. As a result of the analysis, we state that the analysed article is misleading and it does not provide valuable information regarding decision making for other healthcare professionals in the dental implant field.

Objective To assess the impact of platelet‐rich fibrin (PRF) on implant dentistry. The primary focused question was as follows: What are the clinical, histological, and radiographic outcomes of PRF administration for bone regeneration and implant therapy? Method A systematic literature search comprised three databases: MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane followed by a hand search of relevant scientific journals. Human studies using PRF for bone regeneration and implant therapy were considered and articles published up to December 31, 2017 were included. Eligible studies were selected based on the inclusion criteria. Randomized controlled trials (RCT) and controlled clinical trials (CCT) were included. Results In total, 5,963 titles were identified with the search terms and by hand search. A total of 12 randomized controlled trials (RCT) met the inclusion criteria and were chosen for data extraction. Included studies focused on alveolar ridge preservation after tooth extraction, osseointegration process, soft tissue management, bone augmentation, bone regeneration after sinus floor elevation and surgical peri‐implantitis treatment. Overall, the risk of bias was moderate or unclear. Nine studies showed superior outcomes for PRF for any of the evaluated variables, such as ridge dimension, bone regeneration, osseointegration process, soft tissue healing. Three studies failed to show any beneficial effects of PRF. No meta‐analysis could be performed due to the heterogeneity of study designs. Conclusions There is moderate evidence supporting the clinical benefit of PRF on ridge preservation and in the early phase of osseointegration. It remains unclear whether PRF can reduce pain and improve soft tissue healing. More research support is necessary to comment on the role of PRF to improve other implant therapy outcomes.

Aim: To comparatively evaluate the morbidity following maxillary sinus floor elevation according to either transcrestal (tSFE) or lateral (lSFE) approach with concomitant implant placement. Materials & Methods: Patients with ≥1 edentulous maxillary posterior site with residual bone height (RBH) of 3–6mm were enrolled. tSFE was performed in association with a xenograft and a collagen matrix. For lSFE, the sinus was grafted with the xenograft, and the antrostomy was covered with a membrane. Implants were inserted concomitantly. The postoperative course was assessed through questionnaires. Pain level (VASpain) was recorded using a 100-mm visual analogue scale. Results: Twenty-nine and 28 patients were included in tSFE and lSFE group, respectively. On the day of surgery, VASpain was significantly higher for tSFE compared to lSFE, and similar from day 1 to 14. tSFE was characterized by significantly lower incidence of swelling, bruising and nasal discharge/bleeding. Significantly less severe limitation in swallowing, continuing daily activities, eating, speaking, opening the mouth and going to school/work was found for tSFE only at specific postsurgery intervals. Conclusions: lSFE was associated with lower pain on the day of surgery, and tSFE revealed lower postoperative morbidity as well as more tolerable postoperative course.

Aim To compare the effectiveness of two-ridge preservation treatments. Materials and Methods 40 subjects with extraction sockets exhibiting substantial buccal dehiscences were enrolled and randomized across 10 standardized centers. Treatments were demineralized allograft plus reconstituted and cross-linked collagen membrane (DFDBA+RECXC) or deproteinized bovine bone mineral with collagen plus native, bilayer collagen membrane (DBBMC+NBCM). Socket dimensions were recorded at baseline and 6-months. Wound closure and soft tissue inflammation were followed post-operatively, and biopsies were retrieved for histomorphometric analysis at 6-months. Results Primary endpoint: at 6-months extraction socket horizontal measures were significantly greater for DBBMC+NBCM (average 1.76 mm greater, p= 0.0256). Secondary and Exploratory endpoints: (1) lingual and buccal vertical bone changes were not significantly different between the two treatment modalities, (2) histomorphometric % new bone and % new bone+graft were not significantly different, but significantly more graft remnants remained for DBBMC; (3) at 1-month incision line gaps were significantly greater and more incision lines remained open for DFDBA+RECXC; (4) higher inflammation at 1-week tended to correlate with lower ridge preservation results; and (5) deeper socket morphologies with thinner bony walls correlated with better ridge preservation. 37 of 40 sites had sufficient ridge dimension for implant placement at 6-months; the remainder were DFDBA+RECXC sites. Conclusion DBBMC+NBCM provided better soft tissue healing and ridge preservation for implant placement. Deeper extraction sockets with higher and more intact bony walls responded more favorably to ridge preservation therapy. Further investigation of implant integration and long-term survival is warranted. clinicaltrials. gov identifier NCT02330523. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.

Background Acceptable short-term survival rates (>90 %) of mini-implants (diameter

Objective Evaluation of differences in the clinical performance and crestal bone levels between implants restored with single crowns with platform-matched or platform-switched abutments after 3 years. Material and Methods The study enrolled adult patients missing two or more adjacent teeth in the posterior mandible with natural teeth mesial to the implant site. Randomization followed open-flap implant insertion and the corresponding matching or switching healing abutments placed at surgery. Conventional loading was made with cemented crowns. Clinical follow-up took place annually after loading up to 3 years. Bone level changes were measured in standardized radiographs as the variation in crestal bone from one evaluation to the next. Results Sixty-three patients with a total of 135 implants (66 platform matching, 69 platform switching) were analysed. From surgery to 36 months, mean bone loss was 0.28 ± 0.56 mm for the platform-switching group and 0.68 ± 0.64 mm for the platform-matching group. A statistically significant difference was found between groups (p = 0.002) with an estimate of 0.39 mm (0.15–0.64, 95% CI) in favour of platform switching. Conclusions After 3 years, platform-switching restorations showed a significant effect in the preservation of marginal bone levels compared to platform-matching restorations.

Parkinson’s Disease (PD) is one of the most frequent neurodegenerative diseases, second only to Alzheimer’s disease. It is a progressive disease that inevitably leads the patient to death, in most cases for pneumonia ab ingestis. It affects 120 people out of 100,000 and more frequently affects men than women. The main symptoms are divided into motor, non-motor and behavioral ones. The main motors symptoms are tremor, bradykinesia and postural instability. Non-motor symptoms include autonomic nervous dysfunction (orthostatic hypotension, cardiac arrhythmia, sexual dysfunction, excessive sweating due to hypothalamic dysfunction, constipation), insomnia, OSAS, and olfactory dysfunction. Behavioral symptoms are depression, dementia and psychosis. The purpose of this study is to evaluate, through a systematic review of literature, the oral health status of the Parkinson’s patient compared with the general population with particular reference to the incidence of caries and periodontal disease, the patient’s management during dental interventions and the possibility of rehabilitating the patient with implanted therapy.