Institutes
Refine
Document Type
- Article (4) (remove)
Language
- English (4)
Has Fulltext
- yes (4)
Is part of the Bibliography
- no (4)
Keywords
- Biopsy (1)
- Dental implant (1)
- Immunohistochemistry (1)
- Macrophage polarization (1)
- Peri-implantitis (1)
- alveolar ridge augmentation (1)
- animal experiments (1)
- bone (1)
- clinical study (1)
- dental implant (1)
Institute
- Medizin (4)
Objectives: To assess and compare the efficacy and safety of autogenous tooth roots (TRs) and autogenous bone blocks (ABs) for combined vertical and horizontal alveolar ridge augmentation and two-stage implant placement.
Materials and Methods: A total of 28 patients in need of implant therapy and vertical ridge augmentation were allocated to parallel groups receiving either healthy autogenous tooth roots (e.g., retained wisdom teeth) (n = 14, n = 15 defects) or cortical autogenous bone blocks harvested from the retromolar area (n = 14, n = 17 defects). After 26 weeks of submerged healing, the clinical reduction in ridge height (RH) deficiency was defined as the primary outcome.
Results: Both surgical procedures were associated with a similar mean reduction in RH deficiency values, amounting to 4.48 ± 2.42 mm (median: 4.25; 95% CI: 3.08–5.88) in the TR group and 4.46 ± 3.31 mm (median: 3.00; 95% CI: 2.54–6.38) in the AB group (p = .60, Mann–Whitney U-test). In all patients investigated, the reduction in RH deficiency values allowed for an adequate implant placement at the respective sites. The frequency of complications (e.g., soft tissue dehiscences) was low (TR: n = 4; AB: n = 0).
Conclusions: Up to staged-implant placement, both TR and AB grafts appeared to be associated with comparable efficacy and safety for combined vertical and horizontal alveolar ridge augmentation.
Objectives: To evaluate peri-implant tissue dimensions following nonsurgical (NS) and surgical therapy (S) employing different decontamination protocols of advanced ligature-induced peri-implantitis in dogs.
Material & Methods: Peri-implantitis defects (n = 5 dogs, n = 30 implants) were randomly and equally allocated in a split-mouth design to NS or S treatment using either an Er:YAG laser (ERL), an ultrasonic device (VUS), or plastic curettes + local application of metronidazole gel (PCM), respectively. Horizontal bone thickness (hBT) and soft tissue thickness (hMT) were measured at different reference points: (v0) at the marginal portion of the peri-implant mucosa (PM); (v1) at 50% of the distance from PM to bone crest (BC); (v2) at the BC; (v3) at the most coronal extension of the bone-to-implant contact. Vertical peri-implant tissue height was calculated from PM to BC.
Results: All of the treatment groups showed a gradual hMT increase from v0 to the v2 reference point, followed by a reduction from v2 to the v3 region. The S-VUS subgroup tended to be associated with higher hMT values at the v0 region than the NS-VUS subgroup (0.44 mm versus 0.31 mm). PM-BC distance varied from 2.22 to 2.83 mm in the NS group, and from 2.07 to 2.38 in the S group.
Conclusion: Vertical and horizontal peri-implant tissue dimensions were similar in different treatment groups.
The prevalence of peri-implant diseases around subcrestally placed implants: a cross-sectional study
(2021)
Objectives: To evaluate the prevalence of peri-implant health, peri-implant mucositis or periimplantitis for subcrestally placed implants (1–3 mm) on the short-, medium- and long term.
Material and Methods: Two hundred patients were enrolled in this cross-sectional study that were treated and screened during regular maintenance visits at one university center. A total of 657 implants were evaluated. Peri-implant health and diseases were assessed according to predefined case definitions. Binary logistic regression was used to assess the correlation with local and systemic factors.
Results: After a median function time of 9.36 ± 6.44 years (range: 1–26 years), the prevalence of peri-implant mucositis and peri-implantitis was 66.5% and 15.0%, at the patient level, corresponding to 62.6% and 7.5%, at the implant level, respectively. Peri-implantitis was significantly associated with patients’ history of periodontitis (odds ratio, OR 5.33).
Conclusion: Peri-implant diseases were a common finding around subcrestally placed implants.
Objectives: To immunohistochemically characterize and correlate macrophage M1/M2 polarization status with disease severity at peri-implantitis sites.
Materials and methods: A total of twenty patients (n = 20 implants) diagnosed with peri-implantitis (i.e., bleeding on probing with or without suppuration, probing depths ≥ 6 mm, and radiographic marginal bone loss ≥ 3 mm) were included. The severity of peri-implantitis was classified according to established criteria (i.e., slight, moderate, and advanced). Granulation tissue biopsies were obtained during surgical therapy and prepared for immunohistological assessment and macrophage polarization characterization. Macrophages, M1, and M2 phenotypes were identified through immunohistochemical markers (i.e., CD68, CD80, and CD206) and quantified through histomorphometrical analyses.
Results: Macrophages exhibiting a positive CD68 expression occupied a mean proportion of 14.36% (95% CI 11.4–17.2) of the inflammatory connective tissue (ICT) area. Positive M1 (CD80) and M2 (CD206) macrophages occupied a mean value of 7.07% (95% CI 5.9–9.4) and 5.22% (95% CI 3.8–6.6) of the ICT, respectively. The mean M1/M2 ratio was 1.56 (95% CI 1–12–1.9). Advanced peri-implantitis cases expressed a significantly higher M1 (%) when compared with M2 (%) expression. There was a significant correlation between CD68 (%) and M1 (%) expression and probing depth (PD) values.
Conclusion: The present immunohistochemical analysis suggests that macrophages constitute a considerable proportion of the inflammatory cellular composition at peri-implantitis sites, revealing a significant higher expression for M1 inflammatory phenotype at advanced peri-implantitis sites, which could possibly play a critical role in disease progression.
Clinical relevance: Macrophages have critical functions to establish homeostasis and disease. Bacteria might induce oral dysbiosis unbalancing the host’s immunological response and triggering inflammation around dental implants. M1/M2 status could possibly reveal peri-implantitis’ underlying pathogenesis.