See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/286368968

Peri-implantitis etiology, diagnosis and management

Conference Paper · September 2010

DOI: 10.13140/RG.2.1.3860.7445

CITATIONS READS

0 1,714

1 author:

Abdul Naser Tamim

Abu Dhabi Health Services Company
15 PUBLICATIONS   0 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Success Evaluation in Implant Dentisrty View project

Root’s Apical Resorption Management: Observational Prospective View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Abdul Naser Tamim on 09 December 2015.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

ITI Middle East Section Meeting

Peri-implantitis

Hotel Monroe Beirut - Lebanon

21 September 2010
Introduction

Definition and
clinical diagnosis

Management

Prevention
Introduction
Oral implants have enjoyed high clinical success rates over the last decade,
with an explosion of numerous surfaces and designs of implants all claiming
to have superior quality over another.

It should be recognized however, that clinical complications or failures do

occur and as such, a challenge is posed to the clinician in terms of initial
diagnosis of peri-implant diseases and subsequent management.
Introduction

A peri-implant disease is a descriptive term used to describe a non specific

inflammatory reaction in the host tissues.

“Peri-implantitis” should be distinguished from “peri-implant mucositis” in

that the former is defined as, “an inflammatory reaction with loss of
supporting bone in the tissues surrounding a functioning implant”,4 while
the latter involves a reversible inflammation localized to the soft tissues
only.

Peri-implantitis may display some or all of the following symptoms;

bleeding on probing, increased probing pocket depth, mobility, suppuration
and pain.
Introduction
Introduction
The incidence of peri-implantitis is quite rare, ranging from 2-10%.*
Though this condition is somewhat rare at present, there is little doubt
that as the length of time of implants in vivo increases, the incidence of
this condition will also increase.

The trends show that there is a “cluster phenomenon” whereby peri-

implantitis failures tend to occur in a subset of patients, similar to that seen in
chronic periodontitis.**

• A systematic review of the incidence of biological and technical complications in implant dentistry reported
in prospective longitudinal studies of the last 5 years. (Berglund T, Person L, Kline B. J Clin Periodontal 2002;

** A long term survey of tooth loss in 600 treated periodontal patients. (Hirschfield L, Wasserman B. J
Periodontal 1978
Introduction
There is a statistically significant higher incidence of peri–implantitis for
implants placed in patients with a history of chronic periodontitis (28.6%)
compared with periodontally healthy individuals (5.8%).* The correlation
between the presence of periodontitis and the development of peri–
implantitis has been supported by a recent systematic review.**

*Kotsovilis S, Karoussis IK, Trianti M, Fourmousis I. Therapy of peri–

implantitis: a systematic review. J Clin Periodontol 2008; 35: 621–629.

**Renvert S, Persson GR. Periodontitis as a potential risk factor for peri–

implantitis. J Clin Periodontol 2009; 36 (Suppl. 10): 9–14.
Introduction
Therefore it is not surprising that the treatments suggested for peri-implantitis
are based on the available evidence on the treatment of periodontitis.

Peri-implant diseases: Consensus Report of the Sixth European Workshop on

Periodontology. 2008 Jan Lindhe, Joerg Meyle.
Introduction
Management of perimplantitis generally works on the assumption that there
is a primary microbial etiology. Furthermore, it is assumed that micro-
organisms and/or their byproducts lead to infection of the surrounding tissues
and subsequent destruction of the alveolar bone surrounding an implant. *

* Mombelli A. Microbiology and antimicrobial therapy of peri-implantitis. Periodontol

2000 2002; 28:177-189.
Peri-implantitis
Definition
Inflammatory reaction in the mucosa surrounding an implant with signs of loss
of supporting bone.

(Zitzmann & Berglundh 2008 Journal of Clinical Periodontology 6'Th European workshop
on Periodontology)
Clinical Diagnosis

Diagnosis of peri-implantitis relies on crude parameters commonly used for

the diagnosis of periodontal diseases.

Typical signs and symptoms of peri-implantitis include; *

* Etiology, diagnosis, and treatment considerations in peri-implantitis. (Mombelli, A. Curr- O pin

Periodontal 1997; 4:127-136)

** The diagnosis and treatment of peri-implantitis.( Mombelli A, Lang NP..

Periodontal 2000 1998; 17:63-76)
Evidence of vertical destruction of the
crestal bone.

Formation of a peri-implant pocket (>

4mm),

Bleeding or suppuration after gently

probing,

Tissue redness and swelling

Mobility (insensitive in detecting early

implant failure).
 Clinical Diagnosis
Clinical signs of peri-implantitis may not always be evident. Standardized
radiographs are suggested one year after fixture placement and every
alternate year thereafter.*

• Dental implants:
maintenance, care and
treatment of peri-implant
infection.
Chen S, Darby I. Aust
Dent J 2003; 48(4):212-
220.
Clinical Diagnosis
Microbiology
Numerous animal and human studies have clearly shown that bacterial
plaque which is allowed to build up on implants leads to inflammatory
changes of the adjacent soft tissues.

The relationship between these inflammatory changes in the soft tissues

and subsequent progression to involve bone loss that is observed in peri-
implantitis is not clarified.

An early study, which compared the microbiota surrounding successful and

failing titanium implants found that failing sites had a significantly higher
proportion of micro-organisms traditionally associated with periodontal
diseases.
Microbiology

Gram negative anaerobic rods, spirochaetes and fusiform bacteria were found
in higher proportions at peri-implantitis sites as compared with healthy sites,
which were predominantly composed of coccoid forms.*
The clinical implication is, if traditional periodontal pathogens are found, then
the disease process could be similar to periodontal disease and patients
with a history of chronic periodontitis may be at increased risk of peri-
implantitis. It is suggested, that the microbiology associated with implants
are related to the bacteria already resident in the oral cavity, that is, that the
remaining teeth can act as reservoirs for seeding of bacteria in the peri-
implant tissues.
 Microbiology

Traditional periodontal pathogens such as Porphyromonas gingivalis (Pg),

Actinomyces actinomycetemcomitans (Aa) and Prevotella intermedia (Pi)
have been shown to colonize the peri-implant sulcus from 1 to 3 months
after exposure to the oral environment.*
* Mombelli A, Van Oosten MAC, Schurch E, Lang NP. The microbiota associated with
successful or failing osseointegrated titanium implants. Oral Microbial Immanuel 1987;
2:145-151.
Management
An explosion of human and animal studies in the last 20 years has addressed
the issue of treatment of peri-implant infections, with little scientific evidence to
support a specific treatment modality (for review see Roos-Jansåker et al.
2003).34 Management of periimplantitis generally works on the assumption
that there is a primary microbial etiology.

Furthermore, it is assumed that micro-organisms and/or their byproducts

lead to infection of the surrounding tissues and subsequent destruction of
the alveolar bone surrounding an implant. Mombelli (2002),8
Management
suggests five considerations in the therapy of peri-implantitis:

(1) The disturbance and/or removal of the bacterial biofilm in the peri-
implant pocket

(2) “Decontamination” and conditioning of the surface of the implant

(3) Correction via reduction or elimination of sites that cannot be adequately

maintained by oral hygiene measures

(4) Establishment of an effective plaque control regime

(5) Re-osseointegration
Management

A hygienic phase should be started which will improve the patient's

hygiene level through a process of remotivation and reinstruction with
regard to plaque control.

The implant neck should be accessible to the patient so that hygiene

can be maintained even if this means modifying the superstructures.*

* Non-surgical treatment of peri-implant mucositis and peri-implantitis: a literature review.

Renvert S, Roos-Jansaker A-M, Claffey N. 2002
Management
 Management

The “cumulative interceptive supportive therapy”(CIST),37 suggests a

protocol for the monitoring of healthy implants and the interception of peri-
implant diseases (Fig.3).

This protocol relies on PPD, BOP and radiographic evidence of bone loss.
As each parameter becomes more severe, more complex treatment is
introduced, with each subsequent treatment incorporating that of the
previous.

For example, according to this protocol, if a PPD of 6mm is displayed,

positive for BOP and greater than 2mm bone loss, combination therapy of A
+ B + C + D is instituted.
Management
Cumulative interceptive supportive therapy (CIST) protocol is divided into
four stages of treatment: **

• Protocol A (mechanical debridement) : In case of implants with

evident plaque and/or calculus deposits adjacent to only slightly
inflamed periimplant tissues (Bleeding On Probing is positive)

• Protocol B (antiseptic treatment): It is performed in

situation where in addition to plaque and BOP, probing
depth in increased up to 4-5 mm. Chlorhexidine
digluconate either in the form of daily rinse of 0.1%,
0.12% or 0.2 or as a gel applied to the site of desired
action.
Management
• Protocol C (antibiotic treatment): When probing depth value of the
periimplant sulcus or pocket increases to 6 mm or more. Beside
the protocol A and B, an antibiotic directed at the elimination of
gram negative anaerobic bacteria is administrated.

• Protocol D (regenerative or resective therapy): Only if

infection is controlled successfully by A, B and C as evidenced
by an absence of suppuration and reduced edema. It is aimed
to restore the bony support of the implant by means of
regenerative techniques. **

E. Explantation using specially designed instruments

Management
Management

Decision trees for the diagnosis and interception of peri-implantitis have

been suggested and the complexity of some of these regimes is reflective
of our current understanding(or lack of) about the etiology of peri-
implantitis.
Decision tree for C.I.S.T

*PD denotes probing depth, and BOP bleeding on probing

Implant reconstructions in periodontally susceptible patients, Stanley Man-Lung Lai *, Kwan-Yat Zee), Esmonde F.
Corbet Hong Kong Dental Journal 2008;5:11-8
Recent Study

A systematic review for 25 animal studies for re-osseointegration on

previously contaminated surface gives the following results (Renvert et al.
2009 Clinical Oral Implants Research)

• Open flap debridement combined with implant surface decontamination is

scarcely documented.

• No single method of implant surface decontamination (e.g. hydrogen

peroxide, saline irrigation, Chlorhexidine irrigation, citric acid, air-powder
abrasive, and laser) can be considered superior.
Recent Study

• It is unknown whether the use of systemic antibiotics is required or not.

• Regenerative procedures using bone grafts, bone substitutes or GBR do

not yield predictable outcomes.

• A complete fill of the osseous defect by applying the principles of GBR is

unpredictable, only a partial resolution of the defect may be expected. *

• Biologic complications, prevention and management, Giovanni E. Salvi.

(ITI World Symposium, 2010)
Prevention

The main issue is prevention

1 ) Suitable patient selection

Implants should not be placed if the
infection cannot be controlled by the
dentist or by the patient.

2 ) Infection control
Great care should be taken with implant placement so as to avoid damaging
the host bone. The implant must at no time be contaminated in order to
prevent retrograde peri-implantitis.
3 ) Hygienic restoration design
Accessibility
The prosthetic reconstruction must be placed in such way that it is accessible to
hygiene at the periimplant area.
Poor design led to high risk of failure

Not hygienic restoration design (but with good aesthetics) -

Not accessible crowns and consecuent bone destruction led
to high risk of failure

In cases where aesthetics and hygiene come into conflict, the patient should be
informed about the consequences that restoration with no access to hygiene can
lead to failure.
4 ) Periodic recall visits

Periodical clinical examination should

include:

 Probing: Bleeding on probing is

indicative of mucosal inflammation and
is a warning sign us about supporting
tissue loss.

 Check up for presence of suppuration.

 Radiographs. They should be taken to

evaluate the supporting bone levels,

especially when all the clinical symptoms

suggest the presence of peri-implantitis.
5 ) Early detection of pathologies
Pathologies should be treated at an early stage. The sooner they are
detected, the simpler the treatment will be.

References:

Peri-implant diseases: diagnosis and risk indicators. Heitz-Mayfield LJA.

Peri-implantitis in partially edentulous patients: association with inadequate plaque control. Giovanni Serino,
Christer Ström
 Conclusions
 Peri-implantitis is arguably one of the most significant risk factors associated
with late implant failures.

 Despite a projected increase in the incidence of peri-implantitis, the clinician

is faced with a difficult decision-making process from beginning to end. It must
be recognized that peri-implantitis is a multifactorial disease process, which may
include factors such as, host immune response and susceptibility, microbiology,
host modifying factors and local environment.

 The relevance, contribution and impact of other factors such as implant

surfaces, smoking, history of chronic periodontitis and occlusal loading remains
obscure and undoubtedly further long term studies are necessary for
clarification.
 Conclusions
 So far, single case presentations have provided evidence that bone fill of
perimplantitis defects resulting from previous perimplantitis may be achieved
following anti infective therapy and using biological principle of guided tissue
regeneration GTR
(Lehmann et al 1991; Hammerle et al 1995; Persson et al 1996).

However, the re-osseointegration of a previously contaminated implant surface

into regenerated bone has not yet been demonstrated hisotologically
(Wetzel et al. 1999).

Nevertheless, the fact that new bone does fill osseous defects, as documented
by an increase in radiographic bone density, represents a healing process most
likely resulting in further implant stability over time*1.
Clinical Case
 Peri-
Implantitis
Protocol
A,B,C,D
Loading
 3 Years
Follow up
X-Rays
Review
Take home message
Limited scientific evidence is available to endorse or recommend a specific
modality for treatment and it seems that like periodontal disease, one
regime may be successful in one patient and not another.

Until further research is available, the clinician should make a clinical

judgment based on the individual case using a rational and evidence-
based approach.

C.I.S.T protocol therapy can facilitate remodeling adjacent to the bone-

implant interface; the dynamic nature of the bone and its ability to respond to
changes can bring long term success if treated adequately with patience. In
the previous shown case C.I.S.T protocol was rigidly followed which resulted
in salvaging an otherwise lost implant.
Illustrations and demo pictures adapted from internet open
sources.
Thank you
Dr. Abdul Naser Tamim &
Dr. Arif Al Junaibi
atfahmi@ahs.ae
aali@ahs.ae
Clinical case pictures is courtesy of Dr. Ninette Banday, Dr. Abdul Naser Tamim, Dr. Arif Ali Al Juniabi
 References:
1. Mombelli A, Lang NP. The diagnosis and treatment of perimplantitis .
Periodontol 2000 1998; 17:63–76.
2. Alsaadi G, Quirynen M, Komárek A, van Steenberghe D. Impact of local and
systemic factors on the incidence of oral implant failures, up to abutment
connection. J Clin Periodontol 2007; 34:610–7.
3. Koldsland OC, Scheie AA, Aass AM. Prevalence of implant loss and the
influence of associated factors. J Periodontol 2009; 80:1069–75.
4. Klokkevold PR, Han TJ. How do smoking, diabetes, and periodontitis
affect outcomes of implant treatment? Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2007;
22(Suppl.):173–202.
5. Albrektsson T, Zarb G, Worthington P, Eriksson AR. The long term efficacy of
currently used dental implants: a review and proposed criteria of success. Int J
Oral Maxillofac Implants. 1986; 1:11-25.
6. Lang NP, Mombelli A, Tonnetti MS, Bragger U, Hammerle CH. Clinical trials on
therabies of peri-implant infections. Ann Periodontol 1997; 2:343-356.
7. Niklaus P. Lang, Thomas G. Wilson, Esmonde F. Biological complications
with dental implants: their prevention, diagnosis and treatment. Corbet 2000
Clinical Oral Implants Research Supplement No.1 Volume 11. 2000.
8. Berglund T, Person L, Kline B. J. A systematic review of the incidence
of biological and technical complications in implant dentistry reported in
prospective longitudinal studies of the last 5 years. Clin Periodontal 2002;
29(3):197-212.
9. Mombelli A, Lang NP. Antimicrobial treatment of peri-implant infections . Clin
Oral Implants Res 1992; 3:162-168.
10. Mombelli A, Feloutzis A, Bragger U, Lang NP. Treatment of peri-implantitis by
local delivery of tetracycline. Clinical, microbiological and radiological results .
Clin Oral Implants Res 2001; 14:404-411.
11. Soren Schou, Tord Berglundh, Niklaus P. Lang. Surgical treatment of peri
implantitis. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2004; 19: 141.
12. Esposito M, Worthington HV, Coulthard P, Jokstad A. Interventions for replacing missing teeth: maintaining
and re-establishing health tissue around
implants. Cochrane Database Syst. Rev 2002 ;( 3):CD003069

View publication stats