Resolución de peri-implantitis en una paciente con múltiples implantes comprometidos. Reporte de caso

El propósito de este reporte es describir el tratamiento no quirúrgico y quirúrgico en una paciente con múltiples implantes con peri-implantitis. Inflamación, sangrado espontáneo, supuración y pérdida ósea fueron los signos clínicos y radiográficos observados en los 21 implantes presentes en su boca. Las profundidades al sondaje oscilaban entre 5 y 15 mm. Se llevó a cabo la terapia no quirúrgica asociada a antibióticos sistémicos (Metronidazol 500 mg) y antiséptico (Clorhexidina 0,12%) con la finalidad de reducir los signos de inflamación y sangrado. Durante la re-evaluación se colocaron gránulos de Minociclina de liberación controlada en las bolsas residuales. Los sitios que no respondieron fueron abordados quirúrgicamente, realizando además la implantoplastia de las espiras que quedaron expuestas al medio bucal. Uno de los implantes debió ser explantado. A los 9 meses, no presentaba signos de inflamación peri-implantar, sangrado al sondaje ni pérdida ósea progresiva.

The aim of this report is to describe the non-surgical and surgical treatment of a patient with multiple implants with peri-implantitis. Inflammation, spontaneous bleeding, suppuration and bone loss were the clinical and radiographic signs observed in the 21 implants present in her mouth. Probing depths ranged from 5 to 15 mm. Non-surgical therapy with systemic antibiotics (Metronidazole 500 mg) and antiseptic (Chlorhexidine 0.12%) was carried out in order to reduce the signs of inflammation and bleeding. During re-evaluation, controlled-release minocycline granules were placed in the residual pockets. The sites that did not respond were approached surgically. Also, the implantoplasty of the threads that were exposed to the oral environment was performed. One of the implants had to be explanted. At 9 months, there were no signs of peri-implant inflammation, bleeding on probing or progressive bone loss.

Eficácia da implantoplastia adjuvante no tratamento cirúrgico da peri-implantite / Efficacy of adjuvant implantoplasty in the surgical treatment of peri-implantitis

A terapia cirúrgica tem sido apontada como a estratégia mais apropriada para o tratamento da peri-implantite. Uma dessas técnicas é a implantoplastia, cuja proposta é a modificação da superfície do implante através da remoção de roscas expostas, tornando-a menos aderente ao biofilme. O estudo objetivou avaliar o efeito da implantoplastia no tratamento da peri-implantite, através da comparação entre dois grupos de intervenção: um com e outro sem implantoplastia. Assim, trata-se de um ensaio clínico prospectivo, controlado, randomizado e cego. 13 participantes com 33 implantes foram alocados aleatoriamente em dois grupos: acesso cirúrgico + debridamento mecânico (grupo controle-I) e acesso cirúrgico + debridamento mecânico + implantoplastia (grupo teste- II). Os desfechos primários foram avaliados no baseline e aos 3 meses: Índice de Placa Visível -IPV, Índice de Sangramento Gengival -ISG, Profundidade de Sondagem -PS, Sangramento à Sondagem -SS e Faixa de Mucosa Ceratinizada -MC. Avaliou- se a qualidade de vida pelo Oral Health Impact Profile -OHIP14 e também os marcadores de estresse oxidativo pelas amostras salivares. Os resultados apontaram que 69,2% eram mulheres, com idade média de 60,6 anos. Dos 32 implantes, 16 receberam a terapia I e 16 a terapia II. De todas as reabilitações, 53,8% foram totais e 30,8% foram parciais, sendo as demais unitárias. O teste de Mann-Whitney apontou que os valores de IPV e do ISG no grupo II foram maiores do que no grupo I aos 3 meses, mas não foram significativos (p=0,193; p=0,419). O SS foi maior no grupo I (50%) do que no grupo II (41,6%) aos 3 meses, porém, sem significância (p=0,759). Aos 3 meses, todos os parâmetros - exceto SS no grupo II - diminuíram de valor, sendo significativos para o IPV no grupo I (p=0,038), ISG nos grupos I e II (p=0,011 e p=0,015) e PS no grupo II (p=0,041). O ANOVA Split-Plot não mostrou interação entre tempo e tratamento. O OHIP14 mostrou que no baseline houve predomínio da "Dor física", "Desconforto psicilógico" e "Incapacidade física", enquanto que aos 3 meses houve melhora dos itens avaliados. A análise salivar mostrou que houve uma redução dos níveis de marcadores de estresse oxidativo após o tratamento, sendo significativo para o superóxido dismutase (Z=-2,701; p=0,007). Conclusão: não há evidências suficientes de que a adição da implantoplastia melhore os parâmetros clínicos no tratamento cirúrgico da peri-implantite aos 3 meses, em relação ao debridamento mecânico realizado de forma isolada (AU).

Surgical therapy has been identified as the most appropriate strategy for the treatment of peri-implantitis. One of these techniques is implantoplasty, whose proposal is to modify the surface of the implant by removing exposed threads, making it less adherent to the biofilm. The study aimed to evaluate the effect of implantoplasty in the treatment of peri-implantitis, by comparing two intervention groups: one with and the other without implantoplasty. Thus, it is a prospective, controlled, randomized and blinded clinical trial. 13 participants with 33 implants were randomly allocated into two groups: surgical access + mechanical debridement (control-I group) and surgical access + mechanical debridement + implantoplasty (test-II group). The primary outcomes were assessed at baseline and at 3 months: Plaque Index -PI, Gingival Bleeding Index -GBI, Probing Depth -PD, Bleeding on Probing -BoP, and Keratinized Mucosal Band -MK. Quality of life was evaluated by the Oral Health Impact Profile -OHIP14 and oxidative stress markers by salivary samples. The results showed that 69.2% were women, with an average age of 60.6 years. Of the 32 implants, 16 received therapy I and 16 received therapy II. Of all rehabilitations, 53.8% were total and 30.8% were partial, with the rest being single. The Mann-Whitney test showed that the values of PI and GBI in group II were higher than in group I at 3 months, but they were not significant (p=0,193; p=0,419). The BoP was higher in I group (50%) than in II group (41.6%) at 3 months, however, without significance (p=0,759). At 3 months, all parameters - except BoP in II group - decreased in value, being significant for PI in I group (p=0,038), GBI in I and II groups (p=0,011 and p=0,015) and PD in II group (p=0,041). Split-Plot ANOVA showed no interaction between time and treatment. The OHIP14 showed that at baseline there was a predominance of "Physical pain", "Psychological discomfort" and "Physical disability", while at 3 months there was an improvement in the evaluated items. Salivary analysis showed that there was a reduction in the levels of oxidative stress markers after treatment, being significant for superoxide dismutase (Z=-2,701; p=0,007). Conclusion: there is insufficient evidence that the addition of implantoplasty improves clinical parameters in the surgical treatment of peri-implantitis at 3 months, in relation to mechanical debridement alone (AU).

Research progress in the application of implantoplasty in the treatment of peri-implantitis / 中华口腔医学杂志

Peri-implantitis is a kind of serious complication after tooth implantation. The absorption of alveolar bone lead to the exposure of rough implant surface, which would result in poor long-term therapeutic effect. Implantoplasty promises a better long-term therapeutic effect than bone augmentation technique. This article will introduce implantoplasty from two aspects: therapeutic effect and its influencing factor, safety and effectiveness.