A longitudinal analysis of the impact of nonsurgical and surgical treatment of peri‐implantitis upon clinical parameters and implant stability quotient values. A 2–3‐year follow‐up

Abstract Objectives In this study, the aim was to investigate the medium‐ to long‐term impact of peri‐implantitis treatment upon clinical parameters and implant stability quotient values and to ascertain if magnetic resonance frequency analysis can be used as a diagnostic tool to demonstrate postope...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Peter Harrison, Edward Madeley, Michael Nolan, Stefan Renvert, Ioannis Polyzois
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Wiley 2024-02-01
Series:Clinical and Experimental Dental Research
Subjects:
Online Access:https://doi.org/10.1002/cre2.833
_version_ 1797316420271341568
author Peter Harrison
Edward Madeley
Michael Nolan
Stefan Renvert
Ioannis Polyzois
author_facet Peter Harrison
Edward Madeley
Michael Nolan
Stefan Renvert
Ioannis Polyzois
author_sort Peter Harrison
collection DOAJ
description Abstract Objectives In this study, the aim was to investigate the medium‐ to long‐term impact of peri‐implantitis treatment upon clinical parameters and implant stability quotient values and to ascertain if magnetic resonance frequency analysis can be used as a diagnostic tool to demonstrate postoperative healing following treatment of peri‐implantitis. Materials and Methods A total of n = 26 patients (n = 86 implants) diagnosed with peri‐implantitis were recruited for this prospective cohort study and four different treatment modalities were used. Baseline measurements of a number of clinical parameters as well as implant stability measurements in the form of ISQ were recorded. These measurements were repeated at 6, 12, and 24–36 months following treatment. Analysis of variance was performed for all implants treated as well as separately for each treatment modality. A regression model was also used to determine factors affecting ISQ measurements over time. Results Treatment of peri‐implantitis resulted in significant improvements of both average PPDs and BOP (p < .0001 and p < .01). ISQ values marginally improved initially for all treatment modalities, but improvement was only maintained for 2–3 years in treatment modalities I (+1.28), III (+1.49), and IV (+2.92). There was a statistically significant negative linear correlation between average PPD and the ISQ values recorded both at baseline (r = −.618, p < 0.0001) and at 2/3 years (r = −.604, p < 0.0001). Conclusion Over the 2–3‐year follow‐up period, all four treatment modalities led to improved clinical and radiographic peri‐implant parameters but implant stability posttreatment, as indicated by the fact that the recorded ISQ scores remained stable. As a result, use of MRFA as an adjunct to the traditionally used periodontal and radiographic tools for the evaluation of postoperative implant stability following the treatment of peri‐implant disease cannot be recommended.
first_indexed 2024-03-08T03:18:07Z
format Article
id doaj.art-dfe576cc07074f97ab0ee9e6d940ddb5
institution Directory Open Access Journal
issn 2057-4347
language English
last_indexed 2024-03-08T03:18:07Z
publishDate 2024-02-01
publisher Wiley
record_format Article
series Clinical and Experimental Dental Research
spelling doaj.art-dfe576cc07074f97ab0ee9e6d940ddb52024-02-12T14:56:39ZengWileyClinical and Experimental Dental Research2057-43472024-02-01101n/an/a10.1002/cre2.833A longitudinal analysis of the impact of nonsurgical and surgical treatment of peri‐implantitis upon clinical parameters and implant stability quotient values. A 2–3‐year follow‐upPeter Harrison0Edward Madeley1Michael Nolan2Stefan Renvert3Ioannis Polyzois4Division of Restorative Dentistry & Periodontology, Dublin Dental University Hospital Trinity College Dublin Dublin IrelandDivision of Restorative Dentistry & Periodontology, Dublin Dental University Hospital Trinity College Dublin Dublin IrelandDivision of Restorative Dentistry & Periodontology, Dublin Dental University Hospital Trinity College Dublin Dublin IrelandDivision of Restorative Dentistry & Periodontology, Dublin Dental University Hospital Trinity College Dublin Dublin IrelandDivision of Restorative Dentistry & Periodontology, Dublin Dental University Hospital Trinity College Dublin Dublin IrelandAbstract Objectives In this study, the aim was to investigate the medium‐ to long‐term impact of peri‐implantitis treatment upon clinical parameters and implant stability quotient values and to ascertain if magnetic resonance frequency analysis can be used as a diagnostic tool to demonstrate postoperative healing following treatment of peri‐implantitis. Materials and Methods A total of n = 26 patients (n = 86 implants) diagnosed with peri‐implantitis were recruited for this prospective cohort study and four different treatment modalities were used. Baseline measurements of a number of clinical parameters as well as implant stability measurements in the form of ISQ were recorded. These measurements were repeated at 6, 12, and 24–36 months following treatment. Analysis of variance was performed for all implants treated as well as separately for each treatment modality. A regression model was also used to determine factors affecting ISQ measurements over time. Results Treatment of peri‐implantitis resulted in significant improvements of both average PPDs and BOP (p < .0001 and p < .01). ISQ values marginally improved initially for all treatment modalities, but improvement was only maintained for 2–3 years in treatment modalities I (+1.28), III (+1.49), and IV (+2.92). There was a statistically significant negative linear correlation between average PPD and the ISQ values recorded both at baseline (r = −.618, p < 0.0001) and at 2/3 years (r = −.604, p < 0.0001). Conclusion Over the 2–3‐year follow‐up period, all four treatment modalities led to improved clinical and radiographic peri‐implant parameters but implant stability posttreatment, as indicated by the fact that the recorded ISQ scores remained stable. As a result, use of MRFA as an adjunct to the traditionally used periodontal and radiographic tools for the evaluation of postoperative implant stability following the treatment of peri‐implant disease cannot be recommended.https://doi.org/10.1002/cre2.833dental implantsL‐PRFperi‐implantitissurgical treatment
spellingShingle Peter Harrison
Edward Madeley
Michael Nolan
Stefan Renvert
Ioannis Polyzois
A longitudinal analysis of the impact of nonsurgical and surgical treatment of peri‐implantitis upon clinical parameters and implant stability quotient values. A 2–3‐year follow‐up
Clinical and Experimental Dental Research
dental implants
L‐PRF
peri‐implantitis
surgical treatment
title A longitudinal analysis of the impact of nonsurgical and surgical treatment of peri‐implantitis upon clinical parameters and implant stability quotient values. A 2–3‐year follow‐up
title_full A longitudinal analysis of the impact of nonsurgical and surgical treatment of peri‐implantitis upon clinical parameters and implant stability quotient values. A 2–3‐year follow‐up
title_fullStr A longitudinal analysis of the impact of nonsurgical and surgical treatment of peri‐implantitis upon clinical parameters and implant stability quotient values. A 2–3‐year follow‐up
title_full_unstemmed A longitudinal analysis of the impact of nonsurgical and surgical treatment of peri‐implantitis upon clinical parameters and implant stability quotient values. A 2–3‐year follow‐up
title_short A longitudinal analysis of the impact of nonsurgical and surgical treatment of peri‐implantitis upon clinical parameters and implant stability quotient values. A 2–3‐year follow‐up
title_sort longitudinal analysis of the impact of nonsurgical and surgical treatment of peri implantitis upon clinical parameters and implant stability quotient values a 2 3 year follow up
topic dental implants
L‐PRF
peri‐implantitis
surgical treatment
url https://doi.org/10.1002/cre2.833
work_keys_str_mv AT peterharrison alongitudinalanalysisoftheimpactofnonsurgicalandsurgicaltreatmentofperiimplantitisuponclinicalparametersandimplantstabilityquotientvaluesa23yearfollowup
AT edwardmadeley alongitudinalanalysisoftheimpactofnonsurgicalandsurgicaltreatmentofperiimplantitisuponclinicalparametersandimplantstabilityquotientvaluesa23yearfollowup
AT michaelnolan alongitudinalanalysisoftheimpactofnonsurgicalandsurgicaltreatmentofperiimplantitisuponclinicalparametersandimplantstabilityquotientvaluesa23yearfollowup
AT stefanrenvert alongitudinalanalysisoftheimpactofnonsurgicalandsurgicaltreatmentofperiimplantitisuponclinicalparametersandimplantstabilityquotientvaluesa23yearfollowup
AT ioannispolyzois alongitudinalanalysisoftheimpactofnonsurgicalandsurgicaltreatmentofperiimplantitisuponclinicalparametersandimplantstabilityquotientvaluesa23yearfollowup
AT peterharrison longitudinalanalysisoftheimpactofnonsurgicalandsurgicaltreatmentofperiimplantitisuponclinicalparametersandimplantstabilityquotientvaluesa23yearfollowup
AT edwardmadeley longitudinalanalysisoftheimpactofnonsurgicalandsurgicaltreatmentofperiimplantitisuponclinicalparametersandimplantstabilityquotientvaluesa23yearfollowup
AT michaelnolan longitudinalanalysisoftheimpactofnonsurgicalandsurgicaltreatmentofperiimplantitisuponclinicalparametersandimplantstabilityquotientvaluesa23yearfollowup
AT stefanrenvert longitudinalanalysisoftheimpactofnonsurgicalandsurgicaltreatmentofperiimplantitisuponclinicalparametersandimplantstabilityquotientvaluesa23yearfollowup
AT ioannispolyzois longitudinalanalysisoftheimpactofnonsurgicalandsurgicaltreatmentofperiimplantitisuponclinicalparametersandimplantstabilityquotientvaluesa23yearfollowup