Residual periodontal pockets are a risk indicator for peri‐implantitis in patients treated for periodontitis
Top Cited Papers
- 5 August 2011
- journal article
- research article
- Published by Wiley in Clinical Oral Implants Research
- Vol. 23 (3), 325-333
- https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0501.2011.02264.x
Abstract
Objectives The aim of this retrospective study was to compare the clinical outcomes of implant treatment in periodontally compromised and periodontally healthy patients (PHP), with a minimum follow-up period of 5 years. Methods Thirty treated periodontally compromised patients (PCP) and 30 PHP, with a total of 117 Straumann implants (PCP = 56, PHP = 61) were matched for age, gender, smoking and implant characteristics. The PCP group was further stratified with patients having at least one periodontal pocket ≥6 mm at follow-up examination allocated to a “residual periodontitis” (RP) group, while the remaining patients were assigned to a “no residual periodontitis” (NRP) group. These groups were compared with respect to probing pocket depth (PPD), bleeding on probing (BOP) and marginal bone loss. Results The mean follow-up period in the PCP and PHP groups was 7.99 years (range 5.04–14.40) and 8.20 years (range 5.00–13.46) respectively. There was no difference in mean PPD between the PCP and PHP groups, but the prevalence of implants with PPD ≥5 mm + BOP was greater in the PCP group than in the PHP group, at both implant- (27% vs. 13%) and patient- (37% vs. 17%) level analyses. Mean implant PPD was significantly greater in the RP group (3.18 mm) than in both the NRP (2.67 mm) and PHP (2.81 mm) groups. Mean bone loss was also significantly greater in the RP group (0.68 mm) than in the NRP (0.23 mm) and PHP groups (0.26 mm). The prevalence of bone loss and PPD ≥5 mm + BOP at the implant level was significantly greater for the RP group compared with both the NRP and PHP groups. Conclusions Implants in PCP with residual pocketing at follow-up had increased PPD and bone loss compared with implants placed in PHP and PCP without residual pocketing. Hence, it is the maintenance of periodontal health rather than a previous history of periodontitis that is the critical determinant of increased risk of peri-implantitis, highlighting the importance of effective periodontal therapy and maintenance in patients with a history of periodontitis.Keywords
This publication has 37 references indexed in Scilit:
- A 10‐year retrospective analysis of radiographic bone‐level changes of implants supporting single‐unit crowns in periodontally compromised vs. periodontally healthy patientsClinical Oral Implants Research, 2010
- Long‐term implant survival and success: a 10–16‐year follow‐up of non‐submerged dental implantsClinical Oral Implants Research, 2010
- Ten‐year results of a three‐arm prospective cohort study on implants in periodontally compromised patients. Part 1: implant loss and radiographic bone lossClinical Oral Implants Research, 2010
- Periodontitis as a potential risk factor for peri‐implantitisJournal of Clinical Periodontology, 2009
- Tooth loss and implant outcomes in patients refractory to treatment in a periodontal practiceJournal of Clinical Periodontology, 2008
- Case Definitions for Use in Population‐Based Surveillance of PeriodontitisThe Journal of Periodontology, 2007
- Spontaneous progression of ligature induced peri‐implantitis at implants with different surface roughness: an experimental study in dogsClinical Oral Implants Research, 2007
- Implant therapy in partially edentulous, periodontally compromised patients: a reviewJournal of Clinical Periodontology, 2005
- The microbiota of osseointegrated implants in patients with a history of periodontal diseaseJournal of Clinical Periodontology, 1995
- Probing depth at implants and teethJournal of Clinical Periodontology, 1993