Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Faculty of Dentistry, Chulalongkorn University, Bangkok, Thailand.
Department of Dental Medicine, Karolinska Institute, Stockholm, Sweden.
Clin Oral Implants Res. 2021 Oct;32 Suppl 21:181-202. doi: 10.1111/clr.13823.
The aim of this review was to investigate the evidence correlating the emergence profile (EP) and emergence angle (EA), peri-implant tissue height, implant neck design, abutment and/or prosthesis material, retention and connection types with risk of peri-implant mucositis and peri-implantitis.
Seven focus questions were identified, and seven electronic search queries were conducted in PubMed. Human studies reporting on bleeding on probing, probing depth or case definitions of peri-implant mucositis and peri-implantitis were included.
Emerging evidence with bone-level implants suggests a link between EA combined with convex EP and peri-implantitis. Depth of the peri-implant sulcus of ≥3 mm is shown to be reducing the effectiveness of treatment of established peri-implant mucositis. Modification of the prosthesis contour is shown to be an effective supplement of the anti-infective treatment of peri-implant mucositis. Limited evidence points to no difference with regard to the risk for peri-implant mucositis between tissue- and bone-level implants, as well as the material of the abutment or the prosthesis. Limited evidence suggests the use or not of prosthetic abutments in external connections and does not change the risk for peri-implantitis. Literature with regard to prosthesis retention type and risk for peri-implantitis is inconclusive.
Limited evidence indicates the involvement of EA, EP, sulcus depth and restricted accessibility to oral hygiene in the manifestation and/or management of peri-implant mucositis/peri-implantitis. Conclusions are limited by the lack of consensus definitions and validated outcomes measures, as well as diverse methodological approaches. Purpose-designed studies are required to clarify current observations.
本综述旨在调查与种植体周围炎和种植体周围炎相关的出现特征(EP)和出现角度(EA)、种植体周围组织高度、种植体颈部设计、基台和/或修复体材料、保留和连接类型之间的证据关联,以评估其与种植体周围黏膜炎和种植体周围炎的风险。
确定了 7 个重点问题,并在 PubMed 中进行了 7 次电子检索查询。纳入了报告探诊出血、探诊深度或种植体周围黏膜炎和种植体周围炎病例定义的人类研究。
有证据表明,骨水平种植体的 EA 与凸形 EP 与种植体周围炎之间存在关联。种植体周围龈沟深度≥3mm 会降低治疗已建立的种植体周围黏膜炎的效果。修改修复体轮廓被证明是治疗种植体周围黏膜炎的有效辅助手段。有限的证据表明,在种植体周围黏膜炎的风险方面,组织水平和骨水平种植体、基台或修复体的材料之间没有差异。有限的证据表明,在外部连接中使用或不使用修复体基台并不会改变种植体周围炎的风险。关于修复体保留类型和种植体周围炎风险的文献尚无定论。
有限的证据表明,EA、EP、龈沟深度和口腔卫生受限的可及性参与了种植体周围黏膜炎/种植体周围炎的表现和/或管理。由于缺乏共识定义和经过验证的结果测量方法以及多样化的方法学方法,结论受到限制。需要进行有目的的研究来澄清当前的观察结果。