PURPOSE: The purpose of this systematic review was to evaluate crestal bone loss (CBL) around zirconia dental implants and clinical periimplant inflammatory parameters.
MATERIAL AND METHODS: The focus question addressed was, "Do zirconia implants maintain crestal bone levels and periimplant soft tissue health?" Databases were searched for articles from 1977 through September 2014 with different combinations of the following MeSH terms: "dental implants," "zirconium," "alveolar bone loss," "periodontal attachment loss," "periodontal pocket," "periodontal index." Letters to the editor, case reports, commentaries, review articles, and articles published in languages other than English were excluded.
RESULTS: Thirteen clinical studies were included. In 8 of the studies, the CBL around zirconia implants was comparable between baseline and follow-up. In the other 5 studies, the CBL around zirconia implants was significantly higher at follow-up. Among the studies that used titanium implants as controls, 2 studies showed significantly higher CBL around zirconia implants, and in 1 study, the CBL around zirconia and titanium implants was comparable. The reported implant survival rates for zirconia implants ranged between 67.6% and 100%. Eleven studies selectively reported the periimplant inflammatory parameters.
CONCLUSIONS: Because of the variations in study design and methodology, it was difficult to reach a consensus regarding the efficacy of zirconia implants in maintaining crestal bone levels and periimplant soft tissue health.
METHODOLOGY: Five electronic databases were searched for studies that compared implant outcomes in patients with differing HbA1c values. Research quality was evaluated using Risk of Bias in Nonrandomized Studies of Interventions (ROBINS-I) tool. Narrative synthesis and meta-analysis were performed for survival rate, plaque index (PI), bleeding on probing (BOP), probing pocket depth, and marginal bone loss (MBL). Categorical dose-response meta-analysis (DRMA) was conducted according to length of follow-up.
RESULTS: Twenty-two studies met the inclusion criteria. Prospective studies were mostly of moderate quality, but non-prospective papers had serious to critical risk of bias. Survival rate was high for the first 3 years (92.6%-100%) for patients with HbA1c less than 8%. Meta-analysis revealed worsening clinical parameters with increasing HbA1c. DRMA further established a significant dose-response relationship between glycemic control with BOP (10% more bleeding, 95% CI 0.05-0.16, P = .008) and MBL (0.05 mm more bone loss, 95% CI 0.01-0.09, P = .002) per HbA1c category, but no association with probing pocket depth. Osseointegration progressed at a slower rate, and inflammatory cytokines and bone biomarkers were adversely affected in patients with HbA1c above 8%.
CONCLUSION: Moderate evidence suggests a high short-term survival but possible dose-response trend of worsening BOP and MBL in association with glycemic control. Clinically, HbA1c values must be considered for risk assessment before placement and throughout the lifespan of the implant placed in a patient with diabetes.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: Twenty-one patients with implants were included in this study and implants were assessed by resonance frequency analysis (RFA). Bone levels of the implants were assessed by measuring mesial and distal bone levels from the periapical radiograph, and soft tissue was assessed from probing depth using a periodontal probe. Implants were assessed for stability and probing depth at pre-loading, at 3 months and 6 months post-loading. RFA and probing depth were statistically compared from different time points. Correlation of probing depth and marginal bone loss with implant stability was also determined.
RESULTS: The average change in implant stability quotient (ISQ) measurements from pre-loading to 6 months post-loading was found to be statistically significant (p <0.005). The average probing depth reduced from 1.767 mm at pre-loading to 1.671 mm at post-loading 3 months, and 1.600 mm at post-loading 6 months. At 6 months of function, radiographic examination yielded 0.786 mm mesial bone loss and 0.8 mm distal bone loss. It was found to be statistically significant (p <0.005) but within an acceptable range. No significant correlation was found between implant stability and bone loss; and implant stability and probing depth.
CONCLUSION: The study revealed an increasing trend in implant stability values with the time that indicates successful osseointegration. Increasing mean values for mesial and distal bone loss were also found.
CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE: The success of dental implants is highly dependent on the quality of bone and implant-bone interface, i.e., osseointegration. The most important factors that influence the survival rate of an implant is initial stability. The present study found the changes in the peri-implant hard and soft tissues and implant stability. This article, while being a prospective study, may show the evidence of successful osseointegration by increasing trend in implant stability (RFA) values with time which can help to the clinician in the long-term management of implants.
MATERIAL AND METHODS: Eighty-nine previously treated patients with AgP were re-examined. Clinical and radiographic parameters before treatment discontinuation and at re-examination were compared. OHRQoL at re-call was assessed with the short-form Oral Health Impact Profile (OHIP-14S).
RESULTS: None of the subjects adhered to suggested periodontal therapy and maintenance after discharge. Mean percentage of sites with probing pocket depth (PPD) ≥6 mm at re-examination was 4.5 ± 5.9%. A total of 182 teeth had been lost over time. Tooth loss rate was 0.14/patient/year. From 68 subjects with documented favorable treatment outcomes, higher percentage of sites with PPD ≥6 mm at re-examination and higher radiographic proximal bone loss was associated with current smoking status. Patients with AgP with <20 teeth at re-call had worse OHRQoL than those with ≥20 teeth. Patients with higher full-mouth mean PPD also reported poorer OHRQoL.
CONCLUSION: Treatment in patients with AgP who smoke and neglect proper supportive care, risk periodontal disease progression. Substantial tooth loss and higher full-mouth mean PPD led to poorer OHRQoL in this cohort.
MATERIAL AND METHODS: Eighty-seven individuals (42 individuals consuming NW and 45 controls) were included. Clinical (plaque index, bleeding on probing, probing depth and clinical attachment loss) and radiographic (marginal bone loss) periodontal parameters were compared among NW and control groups. Gingival specimens were taken from subjects in NW and control groups, assessed for ICTP and CTX levels (using ELISA) and analyzed using micro-Raman spectroscopy. The significance of differences in periodontal parameters between the groups was determined using Kruskal-Wallis and Mann-Whitney U tests. The percent loss of dry mass over exposure time and the rate of release of ICTP and CTX from all groups were compared using the paired t-test to examine the effects of exposure time.
RESULTS: Clinical and radiographic periodontal parameters were significantly higher in the NW group than the control group (P