Effects of adjacent periodontitis on osseointegrated dental implants

Keun-Soo Ryoo; Kyoung-Hwa Kim; Young-Dan Cho; Yang-Jo Seol; Young Ku

doi:10.5051/jpis.2302400120

Effects of adjacent periodontitis on osseointegrated dental implants

J Periodontal Implant Sci. 2023 Nov 6. doi: 10.5051/jpis.2302400120. Online ahead of print.

Authors

Keun-Soo Ryoo¹, Kyoung-Hwa Kim¹, Young-Dan Cho², Yang-Jo Seol¹, Young Ku³

Affiliations

¹ Department of Periodontology, School of Dentistry and Dental Research Institute, Seoul National University and Seoul National University Dental Hospital, Seoul, Korea.
² Department of Periodontology, School of Dentistry and Dental Research Institute, Seoul National University and Seoul National University Dental Hospital, Seoul, Korea. cacodm1@snu.ac.kr.
³ Department of Periodontology, School of Dentistry and Dental Research Institute, Seoul National University and Seoul National University Dental Hospital, Seoul, Korea. guy@snu.ac.kr.

PMID: 38014772
DOI: 10.5051/jpis.2302400120

Abstract

Purpose: This study aimed to investigate whether new-onset periodontitis or apical periodontitis in the adjacent teeth affects osseointegrated dental implants in a beagle dog model.

Methods: One control group and 2 experimental groups (periodontitis and apical periodontitis groups) were defined based on the presence of experimental periodontitis or apical periodontitis, with 1 beagle dog randomly assigned to each group. The mandibular second and fourth premolars on both sides of the 3 beagles were extracted. Eight weeks after extraction, 4 bone-level implant fixtures, 2 on both sides of each mandible, were placed in each beagle. Six weeks after implant surgery, healing abutments were connected. After sufficient osseointegration, plaque control was performed in the control group, while periodontitis and apical periodontitis were induced in the experimental groups. The beagles were euthanized for histological analyses 20 weeks after induction of experimental periodontitis. Statistical analyses were performed using the Kruskal-Wallis test with the Bonferroni correction to compare the 3 groups.

Results: The implants in the control and apical periodontitis groups were well-maintained, while those in the periodontitis group showed clinical signs of inflammation with bone resorption. The bone-to-implant contact (BIC) and bone area values in the periodontitis group were lower than those in the other groups. The distance between the implant shoulder and the first BIC was significantly greater in the periodontitis group than in the control group (P<0.05).

Conclusions: The presence of periodontitis in adjacent teeth can pose a risk to dental implants, potentially resulting in peri-implantitis. However, this was not observed for apical periodontitis. Within the limitations of this study, periodontal care is necessary to reduce the impact of periodontitis in adjacent teeth on osseointegrated implants.

Keywords: Dental implants; Osseointegration; Periapical periodontitis; Periodontal diseases; Periodontitis.

Abstract

Grants and funding