Premium
Association of prosthetic features and peri‐implantitis: A cross‐sectional study
Author(s) -
Yi Yuseung,
Koo KiTae,
Schwarz Frank,
Ben Amara Heithem,
Heo SeongJoo
Publication year - 2020
Publication title -
journal of clinical periodontology
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 3.456
H-Index - 151
eISSN - 1600-051X
pISSN - 0303-6979
DOI - 10.1111/jcpe.13251
Subject(s) - peri implantitis , medicine , implant , dentistry , prosthesis , bleeding on probing , confounding , orthodontics , proportional hazards model , radiography , periodontitis , surgery
Objective To identify the influence of prosthetic features through a comprehensive analysis with other known risk factors. Materials and methods A total of 169 patients ( n = implants: 349) was retrospectively included in the present study. Peri‐implantitis was diagnosed based on peri‐implant bone loss and probing depth. Using radiographs taken 1 and 5 years following prosthesis insertion, the following features were determined: peri‐implant marginal bone loss (MBL), emergence angle (EA), emergence profile (EP) and crown/implant ratio (CIR). The splinted position of prosthesis was also recorded. Multivariable generalized estimating equation was used to analyse the influence of each feature on the prevalence of peri‐implantitis. The final prediction model was constructed by Cox proportional hazard regression analysis. Results The EA showed a significant correlation with MBL. A statistically greater prevalence of peri‐implantitis was observed if EA ≥ 30 degrees, when EP is convex and in middle implant splinted with both mesial and distal adjacent implants in bone‐level implant. A similar correlation was not observed in tissue‐level implants. CIR had no significant effect on the prevalence of peri‐implantitis. Conclusion Over‐contoured implant prosthesis is a critical local confounder for peri‐implantitis. The implant splinted to both mesial and distal adjacent implant has a higher risk of peri‐implantitis.