Journal of Health and Medical Research

Rates of Peri-Implant Disorders and their Risk Factors

^*Correspondence: Pavel Stupakov, Editorial Office, Journal of Health and Medical Research, Belgium, Email:

Author info »

Introduction

Dental implants are now an essential component of prosthetic treatment, but they also carry the danger of peri-implant infections, commonly known as peri-implant mucositis and peri-implantitis. Although plaque buildup on the implant/abutment surface is assumed to be the primary cause of peri-implant disorders, other risk factors have also been identified. The purpose of this essay is to evaluate and explain the periimplant disease risk factors. Inflamed peri-implant tissue and advancing bone loss are the hallmarks of peri-implantitis. The diagnosis is made using radiological bone loss, increased probing depth, and bleeding and or suppuration on probing around the implant. The cut-off value for these factors, however, varies significantly between studies. Renvert et al. discovered in their systematic study that the range of cut-off values for bone loss in peri-implantitis was 0.5 mm to 5.0 mm. These variations imply that not all research have accurately assessed the real state of peri-implantitis. Furthermore, a single X-ray scan at a particular period cannot be used to determine if the bone resorption is progressing.

Signs of danger

Numerous studies have found a direct link between bad oral hygiene and peri-implant mucositis. Given that the pathology and progression of periimplant mucositis are identical to those of gingivitis, it is obvious that poor oral hygiene is a risk factor for the development of the condition. In other words, peri-implant mucositis is brought on by plaque buildup around the surrounding tissue. Keratinized mucosa is another element that, either directly or indirectly, contributes to plaque buildup. Other factors, including geography, periodontal health, systemic illnesses like diabetes, and prosthetic design have also been suggested as risk factors in certain research, however many of these studies did not use multilevel analysis to account for all the potential factors.

Diagnosis

The most effective treatment for peri-implant mucositis was determined to be non-surgical therapy using mechanical or ultrasonic debridement because the inflammatory lesion is only present in the peri-implant mucosa. In certain controlled clinical studies, soft tissue clinical metrics improved with other therapy modalities such as air-abrasives, lasers, and combinations of these with antibiotics or oral rinses. According to certain research, laser therapy may lessen BoP when used in conjunction with nonsurgical treatment but are ineffective for reducing periodontal pockets, clinical attachment level increase, or plaque index. Every patient needs to adopt good oral hygiene habits because peri-implant mucositis is a treatable condition brought on by plaque buildup. As a result, it is essential to remember to do routine maintenance, and if necessary, the shape of the superstructure should be changed to facilitate maintenance.

Conclusion

Numerous studies have shown varying peri-implant disease prevalences, which collectively corroborate the frequency of peri-implant disorders. According to this review, effective plaque control techniques and ongoing, routine maintenance reminders are essential for preventing peri-implant mucositis and peri-implantitis. Additionally, there is a high correlation between the development of peri-implantitis and diabetes and a history of periodontitis. Despite several research on other variables like smoking, the design of the implant superstructure, and the state of the keratinized mucosa, conclusive results have not yet been attained. For predictable implant therapy throughout the long term, additional studies that may be used to inform evidence-based decision-making are required.