Does implant placement using a minimally invasive technique increase early failures among trainees at an academic center?

PURPOSE: This study aims to identify whether dental implants placed using a flapless technique have a higher early failure rate, defined as failure within 6 months of placement, compared to implants placed with flap elevation when a surgical guide is not used. METHODS: A retrospective cohort study was conducted to evaluate implants placed with either flapless (FL) or mucoperiosteal flap (MF) surgery between 2006 and 2012 at the Philadelphia VA Medical Center (PVAMC). Implant status after FL or MF surgery was assessed using dental encounter and radiographs at subsequent follow-up appointments to assess for early implant failures within 6 months of implant placement. RESULTS: The FL technique was used to place 89 implants in 38 subjects, while the MF technique was used to place 381 implants in 139 subjects. Early failure occurred in 37 implants, of which 13 occurred in the FL group and 24 occurred in the MF group. FL surgery was found to be associated with a 265% increase in early implant failure (OR 2.653; 95% CL 1.287-5.469) and was statistically significant (p = 0.0064). Residents were over 200% more likely to have an early implant failure when using the FL technique (OR 2.314; 95% CL 1.112-4.816), CONCLUSIONS: Analysis revealed flapless implant placement was associated with higher early implant failure rates. In addition, early failures were more likely to occur when residents placed an implant using the flapless technique. While FL surgery can result in long-term success, it is a more technique-sensitive approach that requires greater clinical skill and stricter case selection to perform.

Are proton pump inhibitors associated with implant failure and peri-implantitis?

OBJECTIVE: Proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) may be linked to implant failure by affecting bone metabolism and osseointegration. This study evaluated how PPIs influence long-term implant failure and peri-implantitis in PPI users and nonusers. STUDY DESIGN: This was a retrospective cohort study of patients treated at the Philadelphia Veterans Affairs Medical Center between 2006 and 2013. The primary predictor variable was PPI use. Outcome variables were long-term implant failure and the presence of peri-implantitis. Data gathered included demographic characteristics, medical comorbidities, implant location, and dimensions. Multivariate regression models measured independent factor associations. The final study cohort contained 933 implants placed in 284 patients. A total of 323 (32.6%) implants were placed in patients with ongoing PPI use. PPI users were less likely to smoke (22.1% vs 31.9%; P < .01) and use illicit drugs (5.0% vs 9.7%; P = .01) and more likely to have undergone prior bone grafting (18.3% vs 12.9%; P = .03). RESULTS: PPI use lost significance after controlling for confounding factors and was not an independent predictor of implant failure (odds ratio [OR], 0.801; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.56-1.15; P = .24) or peri-implantitis (OR, 0.801; 95% CI, 0.56-1.15; P = .24). CONCLUSIONS: Our study found no independent associations between PPI use and implant failure or peri-implantitis. Contrary to published literature, PPIs may not influence implant health.

Does alcohol consumption protect against late dental implant failures?

PURPOSE: Social factors have been implicated in the development of peri-implant pathologies, including implant failure. This study aims to investigate whether alcohol consumption affects late dental implant failures. METHODS: A retrospective cohort study evaluated implants placed between 2006 and 2012 at the Philadelphia Veterans Affairs Medical Center. The primary predictor variable was alcohol consumption, measured as nonconsumption and mild, moderate, and heavy consumption. The primary outcome variable was late dental implant failure. Univariate, bivariate, and multivariate statistics were applied, with P < .05 used to define statistical significance. RESULTS: Our cohort consisted of 103 patients and 295 implants with a 5-year minimum follow-up. Most patients were male (93%) with an average age of 60 at the time of implant placement. Late implant failure was associated with 30 implants. Compared to nonconsumption, mild consumption was associated with a 75% decrease in late implant failure (P = .0494), moderate consumption was associated with a 60% decrease (P = .3826), and heavy consumption was associated with a 200% increase (P < .1782). Compared to mild consumption, heavy consumption was associated with an 847% increase in late failure (P = .0135). CONCLUSIONS: Results from this retrospective cohort analysis suggest that mild alcohol consumption is associated with a decrease in late dental implant failures.

Hygiene Recall in Diabetic and Nondiabetic Patients: A Periodic Prognostic Factor in the Protection Against Peri-Implantitis?

PURPOSE: Diabetes mellitus is associated with an increased risk of poor outcomes with dental implant placement. This study aims to identify if frequency of hygiene visits is a protective factor for the development of peri-implantitis in diabetic patients. METHODS: A retrospective cohort design was conducted on patients presenting for dental implant placement at the Philadelphia Veterans Affairs (VA) Medical Center from 2006 to 2012. The primary predictor variable was hygiene frequency, recorded as either infrequent, annual (7-12 month recall), or biannual (≤6-month recall). The number of months between implant placement and the presence of peri-implantitis was the primary outcome (time-to-peri-implantitis) variable, which was assessed on a subject level and adjusted for clustered, correlated multiple implants on the same subject. Additional variables were greater than or equal to 60 years of age, male gender, smokers, short implant length, diabetes, uncontrolled diabetes, and removable prostheses. Descriptive, univariate, and Cox proportional hazards regression statistics were computed to measure associations with peri-implantitis with P ≤ .05 used to define statistical significance. RESULTS: The study sample was composed of 286 patients. In total, 748 implants were placed. Subjects greater than or equal to 60 years of age were 2 times more likely to develop peri-implantitis (hazards ratio (HR) = 2.015, 95% Cl (0.985-4.119), P = .0549). Subjects receiving implant-supported removable prostheses were 2.3 times more likely to develop peri-implantitis (HR = 2.315, 95% CI (1.006-5.327), P = .0485). With each hygiene visit, patients' risk of developing peri-implantitis decreased 20% (HR = 0.805, 95% Cl (0.394-1.647), P = .5528). In addition, diabetic patients were 49% more likely to develop peri-implantitis (HR = 1.491, 95% CI (0.758-2.936), P = .2475) than nondiabetic patients. CONCLUSIONS: Diabetic patients may be at increased risk for the development of peri-implantitis and an increased frequency of hygiene visits may reduce peri-implant diseases.

Is Alcohol Consumption Associated With Protection Against Peri-Implantitis? A Retrospective Cohort Analysis.

PURPOSE: Recent studies have pointed to the effects of social factors on the health of dental implants. We investigated whether varying levels of alcohol consumption will influence the health of dental implants and associated peri-implant inflammation. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A retrospective cohort study was performed to evaluate implants placed from 2006 to 2012 at the Philadelphia Veteran's Affairs Medical Center. Alcohol consumption was gathered from the health maintenance records within 3 months of implant placement and served as the predictor variable. Analysis was performed at follow-up visits for the presence of the outcome variable, peri-implantitis, which was assessed at an implant level. A multivariable generalized estimating equation logistic regression model was constructed, and a Wald test was used to analyze the statistical significance of each parameter. The results were interpreted as an odds ratio estimate, including the 95% confidence interval. Descriptive statistics were used to compute and analyze the data, with P < .05 used to define statistical significance. RESULTS: Demographically, our cohort consisted mainly of male patients (92%), with an average age of 60 years at implant placement. The mean interval to peri-implantitis was 30 ± 25 months. Peri-implantitis occurred most frequently within 2 years of implant placement. The incidence of peri-implantitis was greatest among heavy alcohol consumers (42%) and lowest among mild and moderate consumers (12 and 6%, respectively). Compared with no consumption, mild alcohol consumption was associated with a 47% decrease in peri-implantitis (P < .0223) and moderate consumption was associated with a 75% decrease (P < .0250). Heavy consumption was associated with a nearly threefold increase in peri-implantitis (P < .0001). CONCLUSIONS: The results from our retrospective cohort analysis revealed that mild to moderate alcohol consumption is associated with a lower rate of peri-implantitis. However, heavy consumption was associated with an increase in the incidence of peri-implantitis among patients with dental implants.