Fadi Ata-Ali

Do antibiotics decrease implant failure and postoperative infections? A systematic review and meta-analysis

The purpose of this study was to systematically review and perform a comprehensive meta-analysis of the current literature to answer the following question: among patients receiving dental implants, does the use of antibiotics, when compared with a control group, reduce the frequency of implant failure and postoperative infection? A manual and electronic PubMed search of the literature was made to identify randomized controlled trials (RCTs) on the efficacy of antibiotics compared with a control group (not receiving antibiotics or receiving placebo). Four RCTs were included in the final review. These four RCTs grouped a total of 2063 implants and a total of 1002 patients. Antibiotic use significantly lowered the implant failure rate (P = 0.003), with an odds ratio of 0.331, implying that antibiotic treatment reduced the odds of failure by 66.9%. The number needed to treat (NNT) to prevent one patient from having an implant failure was 48 (95% confidence interval 31-109). In contrast, antibiotic use did not significantly reduce the incidence of postoperative infection (P = 0.754). Based on the results of this meta-analysis, and pending further research in the field, it can be concluded that there is evidence in favour of systematic antibiotic use in patients receiving dental implants, since such treatment significantly reduces implant failure. In contrast, antibiotic use does not exert a significant preventive effect against postoperative infection. Our recommendations for future research focus on the performance of large-scale RCTs to identify the best choice of antibiotic, timing of administration, and dose. Increased effort is also required to reach consensus and define the most effective antibiotic treatment protocol for patients who are allergic to beta-lactams and for those who are not.

Clinical, microbiological, and immunological aspects of healthy versus peri-implantitis tissue in full arch reconstruction patients: a prospective cross-sectional study

BackgroundDue to the world-wide increase in treatments involving implant placement, the incidence of peri-implant disease is increasing. Late implant failure is the result of the inability to maintain osseointegration, whose most important cause is peri-implantitis. The aim of this study was to analyze the clinical, microbiological, and immunological aspects in the peri-implant sulcus fluid (PISF) of patients with healthy dental implants and patients with peri-implantitis.MethodsPISF samples were obtained from 24 peri-implantitis sites and 54 healthy peri-implant sites in this prospective cross-sectional study. The clinical parameters recorded were: modified gingival index (mGI), modified plaque index (mPI) and probing pocket depth (PPD). The periodontopathogenic bacteria Tannerella forsythia, Treponema denticola and Porphyromonas gingivalis were evaluated, together with the total bacterial load (TBL). PISF samples were analyzed for the quantification of Interleukin (IL)-8, IL-1β, IL-6, IL-10 and Tumor Necrosis Factor (TNF)-α using flow cytometry (FACS).ResultsThe mGI and PPD scores in the peri-implantitis group were significantly higher than the healthy group (p < 0.001). A total of 61.5% of the patients with peri-implantitis had both arches rehabilitated, compared with 22.7% of patients with healthy peri-implant tissues; there was no implant with peri-implantitis in cases that received mandibular treatment exclusively (p < 0.05). Concentrations of Porphyromonas gingivalis (p < 0.01), association with bacteria Porphyromonas gingivalis and Treponema denticola (p < 0.05), as well as the TBL (p < 0.05) are significantly higher in the peri-implantitis group. IL-1β (p < 0.01), IL-6 (p < 0.01), IL-10 (p < 0.05) and TNF-α (p < 0.01) are significantly higher at the sites with peri-implantitis compared to healthy peri-implant tissue, while IL-8 did not increase significantly.ConclusionThe results of the present study involving a limited patient sample suggest that the peri-implant microbiota and which dental arch was rehabilitated involved could contribute to bone loss in peri-implantitis. A significant relationship is observed between the concentration of cytokines (interleukins 1β, 6 and 10 and TNF-α) and the inflammatory response in peri-implantitis tissue.

The effect of orally administered probiotic Lactobacillus reuteri‐containing tablets in peri‐implant mucositis: a double‐blind randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES Probiotics create a biofilm and protect the oral tissues against the action of periodontal pathogenic bacteria. The aim of this study was to evaluate the effects of the oral probiotic Lactobacillus reuteri Prodentis upon the peri-implant health of edentulous patients with dental implants and peri-implant mucositis, establishing comparisons vs implants without peri-implant disease. MATERIAL AND METHODS A double-blind, placebo-controlled, prospective cross-over study was made. The patients were all edentulous and were divided into two groups, (A) no peri-implant disease, and (B) peri-implant mucositis affecting one or more implants. Patients with peri-implantitis were excluded. The dosage was one tablet every 24 h over 30 d. All patients in both groups initially received the oral probiotic Lactobacillus reuteri Prodentis, followed by placebo. Patients started with probiotic treatment during 30 d, followed by a 6 mo washout period and the administration of placebo for the same period. The following parameters were studied: crevicular fluid volume, modified plaque index, probing depth, modified gingival index, and concentrations of interleukin 1β, interleukin 6 and interleukin 8. RESULTS A total of 77 implants were evaluated in 34 patients. Group A involved 22 patients with 54 implants without peri-implant alterations, and group B, 12 patients with mucositis affecting one or more implants (23 implants). After treatment with the probiotic, both the patients with mucositis and the patients without peri-implant disease showed improvements in the clinical parameters, with reductions in cytokine levels. In contrast, no such changes were observed with placebo. CONCLUSIONS After treatment with the probiotic Lactobacillus reuteri in patients with implants presenting mucositis, the clinical parameters improved, and the cytokine levels decreased - in contraposition to the observations in the placebo group. Probiotic administration may be regarded as a good alternative for both the treatment of peri-implant mucositis and its prevention, as it also improved clinical parameters in the healthy individuals. Further studies involving larger patient series are needed regarding the effects of probiotics upon peri-implant health.

Prevalence, etiology, diagnosis, treatment and complications of supernumerary teeth

The aim of this article was to review the literature on supernumerary teeth, analyzing their prevalence, etiology, diagnosis, treatment and possible complications. An electronic search was made in the Pubmed-Medline database up to January 2014 using the key search terms “multiple supernumerary teeth” (n=279), “prevalence supernumerary teeth” (n=361), and “supernumerary teeth” (n=2412). In addition to the articles initially identified, others were included in the review proceeding from a manual search and from any references considered of relevance. Supernumerary teeth are those that exceed the normal dental formula. They are more common in men, more common in the upper maxilla, and more prevalent in permanent dentition. Complications associated with supernumerary teeth include dental impaction, delayed eruption, ectopic eruption, overcrowding, spacing anomalies and the formation of follicular cysts. The treatment of supernumerary teeth depends on their type, position, and possible complications, detected clinically and radiographically. No clear consensus exists as to the best time to extract unerupted supernumerary teeth. Key words:Hyperdoncia, supernumerary teeth, impacted teeth, treatment, permanent teeth, deciduous teeth.

Clinical, microbiologic, and host response characteristics in patients with peri-implant mucositis.

PURPOSE To analyze the clinical, microbiologic, and host response characteristics (interleukins 1β and 6) in the peri-implant sulcus fluid (PISF) of patients with healthy dental implants and with peri-implant mucositis. MATERIALS AND METHODS Clinical parameters (modified Gingival Index [mGI], modified Plaque Index [mPI], probing pocket depth [PPD], and absence or presence of radiologic bone loss) were recorded, and PISF samples were obtained from peri-implant sites showing mucositis as well as healthy sites. The periodontopathogenic bacteria Tannerella forsythia (Tf), Treponema denticola (Td), and Porphyromonas gingivalis (Pg) were evaluated, together with the total bacterial load (TBL) and the interleukin (IL) 1β and IL-6 values. RESULTS The study population consisted of 34 individuals, and 77 dental implants were evaluated during the study (23 mucositis and 54 healthy peri-implant sites). The mGI, mPI, and PPD scores of the peri-implant mucositis group were significantly greater than in the healthy group. No differences in detection frequency were found for putative periodontal pathogens and TBL between the healthy peri-implant sites and mucositis sites. The mucositis group showed a significantly greater expression of IL-6 than the healthy group (P < .05). Although IL-1β was increased in the mucositis group, there was no statistically significant difference versus the healthy implant group. CONCLUSIONS An analysis was made of the clinical, microbiologic, and host response characteristics in implants with peri-implant mucositis, establishing comparisons with healthy implants. In the patients studied, bacterial plaque induced an inflammatory response that can lead to the development of peri-implant mucositis. Adequate plaque control is therefore able to increase peri-implant health, avoiding the risk of future complications. No specific association to the studied bacterial species was established.

Treatment of periimplant mucositis: a systematic review of randomized controlled trials.

Objective:To determine the most effective treatment for periimplant mucositis in patients with dental implants compared with a control group. Materials and Methods:A PubMed (MEDLINE) literature search was made of articles published up until October 2013. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) were stratified according to their level of quality using the Jadad scale and levels of evidence (University of Oxford). Results:The combinations of search terms resulted in a list of 371 titles. Of these, 114 references were finally reviewed. Finally, 7 RCTs fulfilled the inclusion criteria and were thus selected for inclusion in the systematic review. Chlorhexidine, the administration of azithromycin, and glycine powder air polishing are not effective for the treatment of periimplant mucositis. The only effective treatment seems to be the use of toothpaste with 0.3% triclosan. Conclusion:Definitions of periimplant mucositis vary in the literature, and no clear criteria have been established regarding the diagnosis and treatment of this disorder. It highlights our lack of uniform treatment and need to establish additional research to fully provide effective treatments for this common condition. More, larger, and longer-term RCTs are needed in this periimplant disease.

Impact of heavy smoking on the clinical, microbiological and immunological parameters of patients with dental implants: a prospective cross-sectional study.

AIM The aim of the present study was to investigate how heavy smoking influences the clinical, microbiological, and host-response characteristics in peri-implant sulcus fluid of patients with healthy dental implants. METHODS A total of 29 individuals with 74 dental implants were included in the present study; 20 implants were in heavy smokers and 54 were in non-smokers. The modified gingival index, modified plaque index, and probing pocket depth were evaluated. Periodontopathogenic bacteria Tannerella forsythia, Treponema denticola, and Porphyromonas gingivalis were evaluated, together with the total bacterial load. Peri-implant sulcus fluid samples were analyzed for the quantification of interleukin-8, interleukin-1β, interleukin-6, interleukin-10, and tumor necrosis factor-α. RESULTS No significant differences in the clinical parameters evaluated were found between the groups, although smokers had poorer peri-implant parameters. Among the smokers, subgingival microbiota was composed of a greater number of periodontal pathogens; these differences were not statistically significant. Smokers showed a greater expression of interleukin-1β, interleukin-6, interleukin-10, and tumor necrosis factor-α, but interleukin-8 was slightly higher among non-smokers, but not significantly. CONCLUSIONS Although smokers presented deeper probing depths, bleeding on probing, and peri-implant microbiota composed of a greater number of periodontal pathogens than in non-smoking patients, these data did not show significant differences. In the present study, and in relation to the samples analyzed, smoking alone did not influence the immunological and microbiological parameters in dental implants with healthy peri-implant tissues. Further studies with larger samples are required to better evaluate the influence of smoking on dental implants.

A Classification Proposal for Peri-Implant Mucositis and Peri-Implantitis:A Critical Update

Definitions of peri-implant mucositis and peri-implantitis vary in the literature, and no clear criteria have been established for the diagnosis and treatment of such disorders. This study proposes a classification for peri-implant mucositis and peri-implantitis based on the severity of the disease, using a combination of peri-implant clinical and radiological parameters to classify severity into several stages (Stage 0A and 0B = peri-implant mucositis, and Stage I to IV = periimplantitis). Following a review of the literature on the subject and justification of the proposed peri-implant disease classification, the latter aims to facilitate professional communication and data collection for research and community health studies.

Does HIV infection have an impact upon dental implant osseointegration? A systematic review.

Background A systematic review is made to determine whether human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) infection has an impact upon dental implant osseointegration. Material and Methods A PubMed (MEDLINE) literature search was made of articles published up until 14 April 2014. The systematic review was conducted based on the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analysis (PRISMA). The quality of the studies included in the review was assessed using the Methodological Index for Nonrandomized Studies (MINORS) and levels of evidence (based on the University of Oxford’s Center for Evidence Based Medicine criteria). Results The combinations of search terms resulted in a list of 132 titles. Nine studies finally met the inclusion criteria and were selected for inclusion in the systematic review. A total of 173 dental implants were placed in 80 patients (135 implants in 56 HIV-positive subjects and 38 implants in 24 HIV-negative patients), and a single loss of dental implant osseointegration was recorded in an HIV-positive patient. Conclusions Our results suggest that dental implant placement in HIV-positive patients does not increase the dental implant failure rate. Prophylactic antibiotic treatment, the administration of highly active antiretroviral therapy, and control of the CD4+ T lymphocyte counts appear to be the main influencing factors in this respect. Given the few studies included in our systematic review, further prospective studies involving larger sample sizes and longer durations of follow-up are required in order to confirm the results obtained. Key words: Dental implants, implant failure, HIV positive, systematic review, AIDS, HAART.

Osteonecrosis of the jaws in patients treated with bisphosphonates.

The literature describes an increasing presence of bisphosphonate-induced osteonecrosis of the jaws (ONJ), characterized by the exposure for over 8 weeks of necrotic bone in the maxillofacial region, after bisphosphonate therapy, in the absence of prior maxillary radiotherapy. The present literature review examines the etiopathogenesis, risk factors, clinical forms, diagnosis, treatment and prevention of bisphosphonate-induced ONJ. In addition, a review is made of all the series involving over 15 patients diagnosed with this disorder between 1 January 2011 and 15 May 2011. A PubMed-Medline search was carried out with the following key words: “bisphosphonates” and “osteonecrosis”. The appearance of osteonecrosis is a serious complication, with an increasing incidence, that affects patient quality of life and causes important morbidity. All patients treated with bisphosphonates are at risk of developing osteonecrosis as a result of such medication. This potential complication therefore should be explained to the patient by both the prescribing physician and the dental surgeon in charge of oral treatment, with the obtainment of informed consent in all cases. Key words:Osteonecrosis of the jaws, bisphosphonates, etiopathogenesis, prevention, treatment.