OBJECTIVES: It is generally accepted that dental implants should not be placed in infected sites. However, the effect of periradicular infections of natural teeth on adjacent osseointegrated implants is less understood. The purpose of this study was to evaluate effects of periradicular lesions on osseointegration of existing implants. Study design Forty titanium solid root-form implants were placed close to premolars in dogs. After healing following implant placement, the adjacent premolars were treated in 1 of 4 ways: group A, no treatment of the adjacent premolar; group B, induction of a periradicular lesion followed by nonsurgical root canal therapy of the premolar; group C, induction of a periradicular lesion followed by nonsurgical root canal therapy of the premolar and surgical detoxification of the implant surface; and group D, induction of periradicular lesion and no treatment of the tooth. After 7(1/2) months, block sections were prepared and the percentage of osseointegration was analyzed histomorphometrically. RESULTS: The average integration for implants in groups A-B was 54%, 74%, 56%, and 68%, respectively. One-way analysis of variance demonstrated no difference between the 4 groups ( P =.518). CONCLUSIONS: The results of this study indicate that teeth with periradicular lesions do not adversely affect adjacent titanium solid root-form implants.
OBJECTIVES: It is generally accepted that dental implants should not be placed in infected sites. However, the effect of periradicular infections of natural teeth on adjacent osseointegrated implants is less understood. The purpose of this study was to evaluate effects of periradicular lesions on osseointegration of existing implants. Study design Forty titanium solid root-form implants were placed close to premolars in dogs. After healing following implant placement, the adjacent premolars were treated in 1 of 4 ways: group A, no treatment of the adjacent premolar; group B, induction of a periradicular lesion followed by nonsurgical root canal therapy of the premolar; group C, induction of a periradicular lesion followed by nonsurgical root canal therapy of the premolar and surgical detoxification of the implant surface; and group D, induction of periradicular lesion and no treatment of the tooth. After 7(1/2) months, block sections were prepared and the percentage of osseointegration was analyzed histomorphometrically. RESULTS: The average integration for implants in groups A-B was 54%, 74%, 56%, and 68%, respectively. One-way analysis of variance demonstrated no difference between the 4 groups ( P =.518). CONCLUSIONS: The results of this study indicate that teeth with periradicular lesions do not adversely affect adjacent titanium solid root-form implants.