Premium
Biological aspects: Summary and consensus statements of group 2. The 5 th EAO Consensus Conference 2018
Author(s) -
Sanz Mariano,
Klinge Bjorn,
Alcoforado Gil,
Bienz Stefan P.,
Cosyn Jan,
De Bruyn Hugo,
Derks Jan,
Figuero Elena,
Gurzawska Katarzyna,
HeitzMayfield Lisa,
Jung Ronald E.,
Ornekol Turker,
Salgado Alberto
Publication year - 2018
Publication title -
clinical oral implants research
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 2.407
H-Index - 161
eISSN - 1600-0501
pISSN - 0905-7161
DOI - 10.1111/clr.13274
Subject(s) - peri implantitis , dentistry , abutment , implant , consensus conference , medicine , narrative review , medical physics , implant failure , psychology , surgery , intensive care medicine , engineering , civil engineering
Objectives This publication reports the EAO Workshop group‐2 discussions and consensus statements which provided the scientific evidence on the influence of biological parameters on implant‐related clinical outcomes. Material and methods The first publication was a systematic review on the biological effects of abutment material on the stability of peri‐implant marginal bone levels and the second, a critical narrative review on how peri‐implant diagnostic parameters correspond with long‐term implant survival and success. The group evaluated the content of both publications, made corrections and recommendations to the authors and agreed on the consensus statements, clinical recommendations and recommendations for future research, which are described in this consensus report. Results Tested abutment materials can be considered appropriate for clinical use according to the observation period studied (mean 3.5 years). Mean peri‐implant bone loss and mean probing pocket depths are not adequate outcomes to study the prevalence of peri‐implantitis, while the reporting of frequency distributions is considered more appropriate. Conclusions Titanium is currently considered the standard of care as abutment material, although other materials may be more suitable for aesthetic locations. Peri‐implantitis should be diagnosed through composite evaluations of peri‐implant tissue inflammation and assessment of marginal bone loss with different thresholds.