Changes of clinical parameters at implants: A retrospective comparison of implants versus natural teeth over 5 years of supportive periodontal therapy
Objectives To compare clinical parameters of implants versus natural teeth over a period of 5 years during supportive periodontal therapy (SPT). Material and Methods A total of 421 SPT patients were screened for implants (I) and corresponding control teeth (C). Data (patient level [P]: sex, age, smo...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Clinical oral implants research 2020-07, Vol.31 (7), p.646-654 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , , , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
Zusammenfassung: | Objectives
To compare clinical parameters of implants versus natural teeth over a period of 5 years during supportive periodontal therapy (SPT).
Material and Methods
A total of 421 SPT patients were screened for implants (I) and corresponding control teeth (C). Data (patient level [P]: sex, age, smoking status, systemic diseases, adherence, oral hygiene indices, mean probing depth [PD]P, bleeding on probing [BOP]P, periodontal risk profile; implant/control tooth level [I/C]: PDI/C, BOPI/C; site level at implants [SITE]: position, dental arch, aspect, BOPSITE) were assessed at the first SPT session where the implant was probed (T1) and 5 years later (T2). The influence of patient and implant/control‐related factors on PDI/C/BOPI/C was tested (linear mixed model) as well as the influence of site‐specific factors on the PDSITE change (multilevel regression).
Results
A total of 70 patients (151 implants) were included. Mean PDI was 2.75 ± 0.85 mm (T1) and 2.87 ± 0.79 mm (T2). Mean PDC was 2.42 ± 0.66 mm (T1) and 2.49 ± 0.71 mm (T2). BOPI increased from 8.62 ± 15.01% (T1) to 24.06 ± 26.79% (T2) and BOPC from 9.97 ± 17.78% (T1) to 15.52 ± 22.69% (T2). The differences between implants and controls were significant for BOP (p = .0032). At T2, BOPI/C was associated with periodontal risk (p = .0351). The site‐specific analysis revealed an association of BOPSITE at T1 with the progression of PDSITE (p = .0058).
Conclusions
Probing depths of implants and controls seem to change similarly during SPT but retention of inflammation‐free conditions at implants appears to be more difficult compared to natural teeth. Patients with a high‐risk profile appear to have an increased susceptibility for BOP around implants, and BOP at implants seems to be a predictor for further PD increase. |
---|---|
ISSN: | 0905-7161 1600-0501 |
DOI: | 10.1111/clr.13601 |