Infection at titanium implants with or without clinical inflammation

Objectives: The aims of the present study were (1)to assess the microbiota at implants in function diagnosed as having either peri-implantitis, or mucositis, or being clinically without symptoms of inflammation, (2) to identify explanatory factors to implant status. Material and Methods: Clinical and microbiological data were collected from 138 subjects (mean age: 62.3 ± 14.9) with 524 implants in function for an average of 10.8 years (S.D. +1.5). The checkerboard DNA-DNA hybridization method was used to identify 40 bacterial species. Results: Subjects had poor oral hygiene with a mean % plaque score 53.2 ± 24.4. In 36% of cases periodontitis was reported as the cause for implant therapy. Mucositis was diagnosed in 61.6% and per-implantitis in 15.9% of all cases. Edentulous subjects had at implants with peri-implantitis significantly higher bacterial loads for Streptococcus sanguis (p<0.01), Fusobacterium nucleatum sp. nucleatum (p<0.02), and Leptothrichia buccalis (p<0.05) than did dentate implant subjects. Dentate subjects had higher bacterial loads of Porphyromonas gingivalis (p<0.02). The levels of Fusobacterium nucleatum sp.vincentii and Capnocytophaga ochracea were explanatory to mucositis. Only a history of periodontitis as cause of tooth loss and smoking were explanatory to peri-implantitis. The microbiota was not affect by supportive care patterns. Conclusions: Presence or absence of teeth partly explains the implant microbiota. A past history of periodontitis and smoking are associated with peri-implantitis. The microbiota at implants with mucositis, or peri-implantitis is similar to that of teeth. Supportive periodontal and implant therapy fails to have an impact on implant microbiota and does not prevent mucositis and peri-implantitis.

Clinical performance of wide-body implants with a sandblasted and acid-etched (SLA) surface: results of a 3-year follow-up study in a referral clinic

PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to evaluate the 3-year success rates of wide-body implants with a regular- or wide-neck configuration and a sandblasted, large grit, acid-etched (SLA) surface. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of 151 implants were consecutively placed in posterior sites of 116 partially edentulous patients in a referral clinic at the School of Dental Medicine, University of Bern. All implants were restored with cemented crowns or fixed partial dentures after a healing period of 6 to 8 weeks (for implants placed without simultaneous bone augmentation) or 10 to 14 weeks (for implants with simultaneous bone augmentation). All patients were recalled 36 months following implant placement for a clinical and radiographic examination. RESULTS: One implant failed to integrate during healing, and 11 implants were lost to follow-up and considered dropouts. The remaining 139 implants showed favorable clinical and radiographic findings and were considered successfully integrated at the 3-year examination. This resulted in a 3-year success rate of 99.3%. Radiographic evaluation of 134 implants indicated stability of the crestal bone levels: During the study period, the crestal bone level changed less than 0.5 mm for 129 implants. CONCLUSION: Successful tissue integration was achieved with wide-body implants with a regular or a wide-neck configuration and an SLA surface with high predictability. This successful tissue integration was well maintained for up to 3 years of follow-up.

Within-subject comparison of two rigid bar designs connecting two interforaminal implants: patients' satisfaction and prosthetic results

BACKGROUND: There is evidence for the superiority of two-implant overdentures over complete dentures in the mandible. Various anchorage devices were used to provide stability to overdentures. The aim of the present study was to compare two designs of a rigid bar connecting two mandibular implants. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Completely edentulous patients received a new denture in the maxilla and an implant-supported overdenture in the mandible. They were randomly allocated to two groups (A or B) with regard to the bar design. A standard U-shaped bar (Dolder bar) was used connecting the two implants in a straight line. For comparison, precision attachments were soldered distal to the bar copings. Group A started the study with the standard bar (S-bar), while group B started with the attachment-bar (A-bar). After 3 months, they had to answer a questionnaire (visual analogue scale [VAS]); then the bar design was changed in both groups. After a period of another 3 months, the patients had to answer the same questions; then they had the choice to keep their preferred bar. Now the study period was extended to another year of observation, and the patients answered again the same questionnaire. In vivo force measurements were carried out with both bar types at the end of the test periods. The prosthetic maintenance service carried out during the 6-month period was recorded for both bar types in both groups. Statistical analysis as performed with the SPSS statistical package (SPSS Inc., Chicago, IL, USA). RESULTS: Satisfaction was high in both groups. Group B, who had entered the study with the attachment bar, gave slightly better ratings to this type for four items, while in group A, no differences were found. At the end of the 6-month comparison period, all but one patient wished to continue to wear the attachment bar. Prosthetic service was equal in groups A and B, but the total number of interventions is significantly higher in the attachment bar. Force patterns of maximum biting were similar in both bar designs, but exhibited significantly higher axial forces in the attachment bar. CONCLUSIONS: Both bar designs provide good retention and functional comfort. High stability appears to be an important factor for the patients' satisfaction and oral comfort. Rigid retention results in a higher force impact and appears to evoke the need for the retightening of occlusal screws, resulting in more maintenance service.

Stability measurements of 1-stage implants in the edentulous mandible by means of resonance frequency analysis

OBJECTIVE: Resonance frequency analysis (RFA) is a method of measuring implant stability. However, little is known about RFA of implants with long loading periods. The objective of the present study was to determine standard implant stability quotients (ISQs) for clinical successfully osseointegrated 1-stage implants in the edentulous mandible. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Stability measurements by means of RFA were performed in regularly followed patients who had received 1- stage implants for overdenture support. The time interval between implant placement and measurement ranged from 1 year up to 10 years. The short-term group comprised patients who were followed up to 5 years, while the long-term group included patients with an observation time of > 5 years up to 10 years. For further comparison RFA measurements were performed in a matching group with unloaded implants at the end of the surgical procedure. For statistical analysis various parameters that might influence the ISQs of loaded implants were included, and a mixed-effects model applied (regression analysis, P <.0125). RESULTS: Ninety-four patients were available with a total of 205 loaded implants, and 16 patients with 36 implants immediately after the surgical procedure. The mean ISQ of all measured implants was 64.5 +/- 7.9 (range, 58 to 72). Statistical analysis did not reveal significant differences in the mean ISQ related to the observation time. The parameters with overall statistical significance were the diameter of the implants and changes in the attachment level. In the short-term group, the gender and the clinically measured attachment level had a significant effect. Implant diameter had a significant effect in the long-term group. CONCLUSIONS: A mean ISQ of 64.5 +/- 7.9 was found to be representative for stable asymptomatic interforaminal implants measured by the RFA instrument at any given time point. No significant differences in ISQ values were found between implants with different postsurgical time intervals. Implant diameter appears to influence the ISQ of interforaminal implants.

Implants and/or teeth: consensus statements and recommendations

In August 23-25, 2007, the Scandinavian Society for Prosthetic Dentistry in collaboration with the Danish Society of Oral Implantology arranged a consensus conference on the topic 'Implants and/or teeth'. It was preceded by a workshop in which eight focused questions were raised and answered in eight review articles using a systematic approach. Twenty-eight academicians and clinicians discussed the eight review papers with the purpose to reach consensus on questions relevant for the topic. At the conference the consensus statements were presented as well as lectures based on the review articles. In this article the methods used at the consensus workshop are briefly described followed by the statements with comments.

Biomechanical comparison of different surface modifications for dental implants

Purpose: A satisfactory clinical outcome in dental implant treatment relies on primary stability for immediate load bearing. While the geometric design of an implant contributes to mechanical stability, the nature of the implant surface itself is also critically important. Biomechanical and microcomputerized tomographic evaluation of implant osseointegration was performed to compare alternative structural, chemical and biochemical, and/or pharmaceutical surface treatments applied to an identical established implant design. Materials and Methods: Dental implants with the same geometry but with 6 different surface treatments were tested in vivo in a sheep model (pelvis). Peri-implant bone density and removal torque were compared at 2, 4, and 8 weeks after implantation. Implant surfaces tested were: sandblasted and acid-etched titanium (Ti), sandblasted and etched zirconia, Ti coated with calcium phosphate (CaP), Ti modified via anodic plasma-chemical treatment (APC), bisphosphonate-coated Ti (Ti + Bisphos), and Ti coated with collagen containing chondroitin sulfate (CS). Results: All dental implants were well integrated at the time of sacrifice. There were no significant differences observed in peri-implant bone density between implant groups. After 8 weeks of healing, removal torque values for Ti, Ti + CaP, Ti + Bisphos, and Ti + collagen + CS were significantly higher than those for zirconia and Ti + APC. Conclusions: Whereas the sandblasted/acid-etched Ti implant can still be considered the reference standard surface for dental implants, functional surface modifications such as bisphosphonate or collagen coating seem to enhance early peri-implant bone formation and should be studied further.

Clinical and esthetic outcomes of implants placed in postextraction sites

PURPOSE: The aim of this review was to evaluate the clinical outcomes for the different time points of implant placement following tooth extraction. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A PubMed search and a hand search of selected journals were performed to identify clinical studies published in English that reported on outcomes of implants in postextraction sites. Only studies that included 10 or more patients were accepted. For implant success/survival outcomes, only studies with a mean follow-up period of at least 12 months from the time of implant placement were included. The following outcomes were identified: (1) change in peri-implant defect dimension, (2) implant survival and success, and (3) esthetic outcomes. RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS: Of 1,107 abstracts and 170 full-text articles considered, 91 studies met the inclusion criteria for this review. Bone augmentation procedures are effective in promoting bone fill and defect resolution at implants in postextraction sites, and are more successful with immediate (type 1) and early placement (type 2 and type 3) than with late placement (type 4). The majority of studies reported survival rates of over 95%. Similar survival rates were observed for immediate (type 1) and early (type 2) placement. Recession of the facial mucosal margin is common with immediate (type 1) placement. Risk indicators included a thin tissue biotype, a facial malposition of the implant, and a thin or damaged facial bone wall. Early implant placement (type 2 and type 3) is associated with a lower frequency of mucosal recession compared to immediate placement (type 1).

Bone response to loaded implants with non-matching implant-abutment diameters in the canine mandible

BACKGROUND: One way to evaluate various implant restorations is to measure the amount of bone change that occurs at the crestal bone. The objective of this study was to histologically evaluate the alveolar bone change around a bone-level, non-matching implant-abutment diameter configuration that incorporated a horizontal offset and a Morse taper internal connection. METHODS: The study design included extraction of all mandibular premolars and first molars in five canines. After 3 months, 12 dental implants were placed at three levels in each dog: even with the alveolar crest, 1 mm above the alveolar crest, and 1 mm below the alveolar crest. The implants were submerged on one side of the mandible. On the other side, healing abutments were exposed to the oral cavity (non-submerged). Gold crowns were attached 2 months after implant placement. The dogs were sacrificed 6 months postloading, and specimens were processed for histologic and histometric analyses. RESULTS: Evaluation of the specimens indicated that the marginal bone remained near the top of the implants under submerged and non-submerged conditions. The amount of bone change for submerged implants placed even with, 1 mm below, and 1 mm above the alveolar crest was -0.34, -1.29, and 0.04 mm, respectively (negative values indicate bone loss). For non-submerged implants, the respective values were -0.38, -1.13, and 0.19 mm. For submerged and non-submerged implants, there were significant differences in the amount of bone change among the three groups (P <0.05). The percentage of bone-to-implant contact for submerged implants was 73.3%, 71.8%, and 71.5%. For non-submerged implants, the respective numbers were 73.2%, 74.5%, and 76%. No significant differences occurred with regard to the percentage of bone contact. CONCLUSIONS: Minimal histologic bone loss occurred when dental implants with non-matching implant-abutment diameters were placed at the bone crest and were loaded for 6 months in the canine. The bone loss was significantly less (five- to six-fold) than that reported for bone-level implants with matching implant-abutment diameters (butt-joint connections).

The use of extraoral implants for distal-extension removable dentures: a clinical evaluation up to 8 years

PURPOSE: This retrospective study reports the clinical outcome following placement of extraoral implants in severely resorbed posterior ridges to support distal-extension removable dentures. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Consecutively treated patients with partially or completely edentulous ridges, with available bone height in the posterior region of 6 mm or less, were included in the study. Implants originally intended for extraoral use (Straumann) were placed in second molar regions and allowed to heal for 4 to 6 months before abutment connection. At recall appointments, the peri-implant hard and soft tissues were evaluated. Complications with implant components, as well as mechanical and structural failures of the prostheses, were recorded. Two-year survival rates were calculated and life table analyses undertaken. RESULTS: Twenty-nine patients (19 women and 10 men; average age 61.2 years, range, 44 to 75 years) were included in the study. Forty-seven extraoral implants in 26 patients were placed in the second molar site of the mandible. Two extraoral implants in 2 patients failed during the osseointegration phase, yielding an 8-year cumulative success rate of 91.8%. The mean distance from the extraoral implants to the most distal tooth/implant was 28.1 mm (range, 16.7 to 39.2 mm). Twenty-three extraoral implants were restored with magnets, 18 with ball anchors, and 4 with conical cylinders. Replacement of abutments and retention elements was necessary in 2 patients. Four abutments in 2 patients were disconnected from the restorations. CONCLUSIONS: Within the limits of the employed research design, extraoral implants may be used successfully to provide support for distal-extension removable dentures in severely resorbed posterior alveolar ridges.

Soft and hard tissue histologic dimensions around dental implants in the canine restored with smaller-diameter abutments: a paradigm shift in peri-implant biology

PURPOSE To evaluate the biologic width dimensions around implants with nonmatching implant-abutment diameters. MATERIALS AND METHODS Five canines had their mandibular premolars and first molars removed bilaterally and replaced with 12 implants that had nonmatching implant-abutment diameters. On one side, six implants were placed in a submerged surgical approach, and the other side utilized a nonsubmerged approach. Two of the implants on each side were placed either 1 mm above, even with, or 1 mm below the alveolar crest. Two months later, gold crowns were attached, and the dogs were sacrificed 6 months postloading. Block sections were processed for histologic and histomorphometric analyses. RESULTS The bone level, connective tissue length, epithelial dimension, and biologic width were not significantly different when the implants were initially placed in a submerged or nonsubmerged surgical approach. The bone level was significantly different around implants placed 1 mm above the crest compared to implants placed even with or 1 mm below the alveolar crest. The connective tissue dimension was not different for any implant level placement. The epithelial dimension and biologic width were significantly greater for implants placed 1 mm below the alveolar crest compared to implants placed even with or 1 mm above the alveolar crest. For five of six implant placements, connective tissue covered the implant/abutment interface. CONCLUSIONS This study reveals a fundamental change in the biologic response to implants with nonmatching implant-abutment diameters. Unlike implants with matching implant-abutment diameters, the connective tissue extended coronally past the interface (microgap). This morphologic tissue alteration represents a significant change in the biologic reaction to implant-abutment interfaces and suggests that marginal inflammation is eliminated or greatly reduced in these implant designs.

Dental phobia is no contraindication for oral implant therapy

OBJECTIVES Dental phobia is a psychological disease and a possible contraindication for implant therapy. The study aimed to show that implant therapy in dental-phobic patients (DP, test group) after adequate psychological and dental pretreatment (PDPT) is successfully possible and results in a similar implant prognosis as in nonfearful patients (NF, control group). METHOD AND MATERIALS 15 DP with PDPT and 15 NF were treated with dental implants and were re-evaluated 2 to 4 years after denture-mounting regarding: alteration of dental anxiety (Hierarchical Anxiety Questionnaire [HAQ], Visual Analog Scale [VAS]), patient satisfaction and compliance, implant success, and peri-implant health. Statistical tests of non-inferiority DP versus NF were performed with Hodges-Lehmann estimators and respective one-sided 97.5% confidence intervals of Moses, and pairwise testings with Mann-Whitney test. RESULTS The DP test group rated its anxiety significantly lower at follow- up than at baseline (PHAQ < .001). However, at follow-up, anxiety was still higher in DP than in NF (PHAQ = .046; PVAS < .001). Implant success at follow-up was 100%. Oral health was equally good in DP and NF patients. At follow-up, all patients were satisfied with implant therapy, but compliance was better for NF (100%) than for DP (73% dental checkup; 67% dental hygienist). CONCLUSION Implant therapy can be successfully performed in DP patients with PDPT as phobia is not negatively influenced by the invasive implant therapy. However, motivation for professional maintenance programs remains challenging.

Long-term clinical, microbiological, and radiographic outcomes of Brånemark™ implants installed in augmented maxillary bone for fixed full-arch rehabilitation

PURPOSE The purpose of this study was to document the long-term outcome of Brånemark implants installed in augmented maxillary bone and to identify parameters that are associated with peri-implant bone level. MATERIAL AND METHODS Patients of a periodontal practice who had been referred to a maxillofacial surgeon for iliac crest bone grafting in the atrophic maxilla were retrospectively recruited. Five months following grafting, they received 7-8 turned Brånemark implants. Following submerged healing of another 5 months, implants were uncovered and restorative procedures for fixed rehabilitation were initiated 2-3 months thereafter. The primary outcome variable was bone level defined as the distance from the implant-abutment interface to the first visible bone-to-implant contact. Secondary outcome variables included plaque index, bleeding index, probing depth, and levels of 40 species in subgingival plaque samples as identified by means of checkerboard DNA-DNA hybridization. RESULTS Nine out of 16 patients (eight females, one male; mean age 59) with 71 implants agreed to come in for evaluation after on average 9 years (SD 4; range 3-13) of function. One implant was deemed mobile at the time of inspection. Clinical conditions were acceptable with 11% of the implants showing pockets ≥ 5 mm. Periodontopathogens were encountered frequently and in high numbers. Clinical parameters and bacterial levels were highly patient dependent. The mean bone level was 2.30 mm (SD 1.53; range 0.00-6.95), with 23% of the implants demonstrating advanced resorption (bone level > 3 mm). Regression analysis showed a significant association of the patient (p < .001) and plaque index (p = .007) with bone level. CONCLUSIONS The long-term outcome of Brånemark implants installed in iliac crest-augmented maxillary bone is acceptable; however, advanced peri-implant bone loss is rather common and indicative of graft resorption. This phenomenon is patient dependent and seems also associated with oral hygiene.

Patients with oral tumors. Part 2: Quality of life after treatment with resection prostheses. Resection prosthetics: evaluation of quality of life

In the present study, the oral health-related quality of life of 18 patients (13 men and 5 women) was evaluated using validated questionnaires as proposed by the European Organization of Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC). The patients belonged to a cohort of 48 patients, whose prosthetic treatment was performed during the years 2004-2007. In the course of tumor resection, 12 patients underwent graft surgery and 14 patients radiotherapy. One patient required a nasal epithesis since resection of the nose became necessary. Five patients underwent a full block resection of the mandible, and tumor resection in 3 patients resulted in a large oronasal communication. Prosthetic rehabilitation was performed in all patients, and the follow-up period with regular care covered a minimum of 3 years. Eleven patients received dental implants for better support and retention of the prostheses. In spite of compromised oral conditions, functional restrictions, and some difficulties with the prostheses, the answers to the questionnaire were quite positive. The majority judged their general health as good or even excellent. The subjective perception of the patients may contradict the objective view by the dentist. In fact, the individual patient's history and experience provide a better understanding of the impact of oral tumors on daily life. The overall assessment identified 4 items that were perceived as major problems by all patients: swallowing solid food, dry mouth, limited mouth opening, and appearance. Prosthetic rehabilitation has only a limited influence on such problems.

Are implants more reliable than severely compromised endodontically treated teeth as abutments for zirconia-based FPDs? : In vitro results of long-term preclinical load simulation

OBJECTIVES The aim was to study the impact of the defect size of endodontically treated incisors compared to dental implants as abutments on the survival of zirconia two-unit anterior cantilever-fixed partial dentures (2U-FPDs) during 10-year simulation. MATERIALS AND METHODS Human maxillary central incisors were endodontically treated and divided into three groups (n = 24): I, access cavities rebuilt with composite core; II, teeth decoronated and restored with composite; and III as II supported by fiber posts. In group IV, implants with individual zirconia abutments were used. Specimens were restored with zirconia 2U-FPDs and exposed to two sequences of thermal cycling and mechanical loading. Statistics: Kaplan-Meier; log-rank tests. RESULTS During TCML in group I two tooth fractures and two debondings with chipping were found. Solely chippings occurred in groups II (2×), IV (2×), and III (1×). No significant different survival was found for the different abutments (p = 0.085) or FPDs (p = 0.526). Load capability differed significantly between groups I (176 N) and III (670 N), and III and IV (324 N) (p < 0.024). CONCLUSION Within the limitations of an in vitro study, it can be concluded that zirconia-framework 2U-FPDs on decoronated teeth with/without post showed comparable in vitro reliability as restorations on implants. The results indicated that restorations on teeth with only access cavity perform worse in survival and linear loading. CLINICAL RELEVANCE Even severe defects do not justify per se a replacement of this particular tooth by a dental implant from load capability point of view.