Survival analysis of implants after surgical treatment of peri-implantitis based on bone loss severity and surgical technique: a retrospective study

被引:2
|
作者
Hwang, Sooshin [1 ]
Lee, Hee-min [1 ]
Yun, Pil-Young [1 ,2 ,3 ]
Kim, Young-Kyun [1 ]
机构
[1] Seoul Natl Univ, Dept Oral & Maxillofacial Surg, Sect Dent, Bundang Hosp, 82 Gumi ro,173beon gil, Seongnam 13620, South Korea
[2] Seoul Natl Univ, Sch Dent, Dept Dent, 101 Daehak ro Jongno gu, Seoul 03080, South Korea
[3] Seoul Natl Univ, Dent Res Inst, Sch Dent, 101 Daehak ro Jongno gu, Seoul 03080, South Korea
关键词
Peri-implantitis; Surgical treatment; Bone loss rate; Surgical method; Survival analysis; FOLLOW-UP; CLASSIFICATION; DISEASES; OUTCOMES; THERAPY;
D O I
10.1186/s12903-023-02981-5
中图分类号
R78 [口腔科学];
学科分类号
1003 ;
摘要
BackgroundFew trials have compared the results of surgical treatment for peri-implantitis based on severity of peri-implantitis and surgical method. This study investigated the survival rate of implants based on type of surgical method used and initial severity of peri-implantitis. Classification of severity was determined based on bone loss rate relative to fixture length.MethodsMedical records of patients who underwent peri-implantitis surgery from July 2003 to April 2021 were identified. Classification of peri-implantitis was divided into 3 groups (stage 1: bone loss < 25% (of fixture length), stage 2: 25% < bone loss < 50%, stage 3: bone loss > 50%) and performance of resective or regenerative surgery was investigated. Kaplan-Meier survival curves and Cox hazards proportional models were used to analyze the cumulative survival rate of implants. Median survival time, predicted mean survival time, hazard ratio (HR), and 95% confidence interval (CI) were calculated.ResultsBased on Kaplan-Meier analysis, 89 patients and 227 implants were included, and total median postoperative survival duration was 8.96 years. Cumulative survival rates for stage 1, 2, and 3 were 70.7%, 48.9%, and 21.3%, respectively. The mean survival time for implants in stage 1, 2, and 3 was 9.95 years, 7.96 years, and 5.67 years, respectively, with statistically significant difference (log-rank p-value < 0.001). HRs for stage 2 and stage 3 were 2.25 and 4.59, respectively, with stage 1 as reference. Significant difference was not found in survival time between resective and regenerative surgery groups in any peri-implantitis stage.ConclusionsThe initial bone loss rate relative to the fixture length significantly correlated with the outcome after peri-implantitis surgery, demonstrating a notable difference in the long-term survival rate. Difference was not found between resective surgery and regenerative surgery in implant survival time. Bone loss rate could be utilized as a reliable diagnostic tool for evaluating prognosis after surgical treatment, regardless of surgical method used.
引用
收藏
页数:10
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [41] Reosseointegration After Regenerative Surgical Therapy Using a Synthetic Bone Substitute for Peri-implantitis: Human Autopsy Study
    Kim, Sungtae
    Hu, Kyung-Seok
    Jung, Ui-Won
    INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF PERIODONTICS & RESTORATIVE DENTISTRY, 2018, 38 (04) : 585 - 591
  • [42] Surgical peri-implantitis treatment with and without guided bone regeneration. A randomized controlled trial
    Heitz-Mayfield, Lisa J. A.
    Heitz, Fritz
    Koong, Bernard
    Huang, Tom
    Chivers, Paola
    CLINICAL ORAL IMPLANTS RESEARCH, 2023, 34 (09) : 892 - 910
  • [43] Prevalence of Peri-Implantitis Related to Severity of the Disease With Different Degrees of Bone Loss
    Koldsland, Odd Carsten
    Scheie, Anne Aamdal
    Aass, Anne Merete
    JOURNAL OF PERIODONTOLOGY, 2010, 81 (02) : 231 - 238
  • [44] Surgical treatment of peri-implantitis lesions with or without the use of a bone substitutea randomized clinical trial
    Renvert, Stefan
    Roos-Jansaker, Ann-Marie
    Persson, Gosta Rutger
    JOURNAL OF CLINICAL PERIODONTOLOGY, 2018, 45 (10) : 1266 - 1274
  • [45] Accuracy of bone-level assessments following reconstructive surgical treatment of experimental peri-implantitis
    Almohandes, Ahmed
    Lund, Henrik
    Carcuac, Olivier
    Petzold, Max
    Berglundh, Tord
    Abrahamsson, Ingemar
    CLINICAL ORAL IMPLANTS RESEARCH, 2022, 33 (04) : 433 - 440
  • [46] SURGICAL-TREATMENT OF INDUCED PERI-IMPLANTITIS IN THE MICRO PIG - CLINICAL AND HISTOLOGICAL ANALYSIS
    SINGH, G
    ONEAL, RB
    BRENNAN, WA
    STRONG, SL
    HORNER, JA
    VANDYKE, TE
    JOURNAL OF PERIODONTOLOGY, 1993, 64 (10) : 984 - 989
  • [47] Submerged healing following surgical treatment of peri-implantitis:: a case series
    Roos-Jansaker, Ann-Marie
    Renvert, Helena
    Lindahl, Christel
    Renvert, Stefan
    JOURNAL OF CLINICAL PERIODONTOLOGY, 2007, 34 (08) : 723 - 727
  • [48] Surgical and Nonsurgical Treatment Protocols for Peri-implantitis: An Overview of Systematic Reviews
    dos Santos Martins, Bruno Gomes
    Hasse Fernandes, Juliana Campos
    Martins, Andrea Gomes
    Castilho, Rogerio de Moraes
    de Oliveira Fernandes, Gustavo Vicentis
    INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF ORAL & MAXILLOFACIAL IMPLANTS, 2022, 37 (04) : 660 - +
  • [49] Surgical treatment of peri-implantitis - Consensus report of working group 4
    Khoury, Fouad
    Keeve, Philip L.
    Ramanauskaite, Ausra
    Schwarz, Frank
    Koo, Ki-Tae
    Sculean, Anton
    Romanos, Georgios
    INTERNATIONAL DENTAL JOURNAL, 2019, 69 : 18 - 22
  • [50] Surgical Management of Peri-Implantitis: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Treatment Outcomes
    Chan, Hsun-Liang
    Lin, Guo-Hao
    Suarez, Fernando
    MacEachern, Mark
    Wang, Hom-Lay
    JOURNAL OF PERIODONTOLOGY, 2014, 85 (08) : 1027 - 1041