A follow-up study of peri-implantitis cases after treatment

Authors

  • Georgios Charalampakis,

    1. Department of Oral Microbiology, Institute of Odontology, Sahlgrenska academy, University of Gothenburg, Gothenburg, Sweden
    Search for more papers by this author
  • Per Rabe,

    1. Department of Periodontology, Division of Specialist Dental Care in Halland, County Hospital, Halmstad, Sweden
    Search for more papers by this author
  • Åsa Leonhardt,

    1. Department of Oral Microbiology, Institute of Odontology, Sahlgrenska academy, University of Gothenburg, Gothenburg, Sweden
    2. Student clinic, Institute of Odontology, Public Dental Health Service, Västra Götaland, Sweden
    Search for more papers by this author
  • Gunnar Dahlén

    1. Department of Oral Microbiology, Institute of Odontology, Sahlgrenska academy, University of Gothenburg, Gothenburg, Sweden
    Search for more papers by this author

  • Conflict of interest and sources of funding statement
    The authors declare that there are no conflicts of interest in this study.
    The study was funded by the Oral Microbiological Diagnostic Laboratory, Gothenburg, Sweden and by grants from TUA research, Gothenburg, Sweden.

Address:
Georgios Charalampakis
Department of Oral Microbiology and Immunology
Institute of Odontology
Sahlgrenska Academy
University of Gothenburg
Box 450
405 30 Gothenburg
Sweden.
E-mail: georgios.charalampakis@odontologi.gu.se

Abstract

Charalampakis G, Rabe P, Leonhardt A˚, Dahlén G. A follow-up study of peri-implantitis cases after treatment. J Clin Periodontol 2011; 38: 864–871. doi: 10.1111/j.1600-051X.2011.01759.x.

Abstract

Aim: The aim of this retrospective study was to follow patient cases in a longitudinal manner after peri-implantitis treatment.

Materials and Methods: Two hundred and eighty-one patient cases were selected consecutively from the archives of the Oral Microbiological Diagnostic Laboratory, Gothenburg, Sweden based on microbial analysis of bacterial samples taken from diseased implants. It was feasible to follow-up 245 patients after treatment for a period ranging from 9 months to 13 years.

Results: In 54.7% of the patients it was not feasible to arrest progression of peri-implantitis. Smoking and smoking dose were found to be significantly correlated to failure of peri-implantitis treatment (p<0.05). Early disease development was also significantly associated with failure (p<0.05). Bone plasty in conjunction to antibiotics during surgery was significantly associated with arrested lesions (p<0.05). In a multiple regression model disease development was the only independent variable to significantly predict the likelihood of treatment success.

Conclusions: Peri-implant health may not be easy to establish, especially in cases that develop disease early. Homogenous treatment protocols rather than empirical treatment attempts should be adopted.

Ancillary