Search

Background: Retrograde peri-implantitis (RPI) is a pathological entity with an unclear etiology (e.g., overheating during implant insertion, residual infection of the tooth replaced by the implant or the endodontic lesion of neighboring teeth) and an extremely low prevalence and has been scarcely investigated. Therefore, the aim of this cross-sectional survey was to evaluate the knowledge and attitude of Italian implantologists regarding RPI. Methods: An anonymous questionnaire was sent via email to implantologists randomly selected, including a section about demographic information and questions related to RPI origin, radiographic representation, symptoms and treatment options. All questions were multiple answer and close-ended. Binomial logistic regression was performed to investigate the relationship between correct answers and the following independent variables: age, years of experience and number of dental implants placed per year. Results: In total, 475 implantologists completed the questionnaire, with a response rate of 46.3%. Based on the results of the study, incorrect answers were associated with less experienced participants (&lt, 80 implants/year) for all questions evaluated, with the exception of treatment strategies. Furthermore, 26.7% of the survey takers did not recognize radiographic representation of RPI and 35.5% picked &ldquo, implant removal&rdquo, when asked about treatment modality. Conclusions: The majority of participants were able to recognize symptoms and indicated the probable causes of RPI, however, around 30% of them showed very limited knowledge of available management strategies.

Background: Recent articles have hypothesized a possible correlation between dental implants dissolution products and peri-implantitis. The null hypothesis tested in this case-control study was that there would be no differences in salivary concentrations of titanium (Ti), vanadium (V), nickel (Ni) and arsenic (As) ions among patients with dental implants, healthy (Group A) or affected by peri-implantitis (Group B), compared to subjects without implants and/or metallic prosthetic restorations (Group C). Methods: Inductively coupled plasma mass spectrometry was used to analyze saliva samples. One-way repeated-measure analysis of variance (ANOVA) was used to identify statistically significant differences in the salivary level of Ti, V, Ni and As between the three groups. Results: A total of 100 patients were enrolled in the study (42 males and 58 females), distributed in three groups: 50 patients in Group C, 26 patients in Group B and 24 patients Group B. In our study, concentrations of metallic ions were higher in Group A and B, compared to the control group, with the exception of vanadium. However, there were no statistically significant differences (p &gt, 0.05) for metallic ions concentrations between Group A and Group B. Conclusions: Based on our results, there are no differences in titanium or other metals concentrations in saliva of patients with healthy or diseased implants.