A prospective study of the clinical outcomes of peri‐implant tissues in patients treated for peri‐implant mucositis and followed up for 54months

• Published in: Clinical implant dentistry and related research Vol. 21; no. 5; pp. 1099 - 1105
• Main Authors: Anderson N Fernandes‐Costa, Karyna de M Menezes, Borges, Samuel B, Angelo, Giuseppe Roncalli, Patrícia dos S Calderon, Bruno C de V Gurgel
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: Chichester Wiley Subscription Services, Inc 01-10-2019
• Subjects: Bleeding; Classification; Dental implants; Dental materials; Dental prosthetics; Gingival bleeding index; Independent variables; Mucosa; Mucositis; Oral hygiene; Parameters; Patients; Phenotypes; Plaque index; Prostheses; Risk assessment; Smoking; Surgical implants; Therapy; Transplants & implants
• ISSN: 1523-0899; 1708-8208
• DOI: 10.1111/cid.12833

BackgroundPeri‐implant mucositis is very common and, when left untreated, can progress to the more serious condition of peri‐implantitis. Therefore, early diagnosis, adequate treatment and, in particular, adherence to a peri‐implant supportive therapy are extremely important for the management of peri‐implant mucositis.PurposeCharacterize the clinical conditions of peri‐implant tissues in patients diagnosed with peri‐implant mucositis after undergoing peri‐implant supportive therapy for 54 months.Materials and MethodsThirty‐eight patients (131 dental implants) who received peri‐implant supportive therapy, associated with oral hygiene instructions, were assessed at baseline and at 54 months for visible plaque and gingival bleeding indexes, probing depth and bleeding on probing. Data were statistically analyzed using the Chi‐square test and relative risk assessment using a significance level set at 5%.ResultsNone of the independent variables evaluated (age, gender, smoking, type of prosthesis, time using the prosthesis, keratinized mucosa, phenotype peri‐implant, classification of visible plaque index and classification of gingival bleeding index) presented significant associations with “worsening” or “improvement” of clinical parameters.ConclusionThe implementation of peri‐implant support therapy was not sufficient for the resolution of peri‐implant mucositis, although reductions in clinical parameters with respect to baseline were observed and maintained during follow‐up.