Catrine Isehed1,2,3, Björn Svenson4, Pernilla Lundberg1, Anders Holmlund2,3. 1. Department of Molecular Periodontology, Umeå University, Umeå, Sweden. 2. Department of Periodontology, Public Dental Health County Council of Gävleborg, Gävle County Hospital, Gävle, Sweden. 3. Center for Research and Development, Uppsala University/Region Gävleborg, Gävle, Sweden. 4. Postgraduate Dental Education Center, Region Örebro County and School of Health and Medical Sciences, Örebro University, Örebro, Sweden.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To assess the clinical and radiographic outcomes 3 and 5 years after the surgical treatment of peri-implantitis per se or in combination with an enamel matrix derivative (EMD). MATERIALS AND METHODS: At baseline, 29 patients were randomized to surgical treatment with adjunctive EMD or no EMD. One year after the surgical treatment of peri-implantitis, 25 patients remained eligible for survival analyses at the 3- and 5-year follow-up. The primary outcomes were implant loss and bone level (BL) change measured on radiographs, and the secondary outcomes, bleeding on probing, pus and plaque at each implant were analysed in 18 and 14 patients at the 3- and 5-year follow-up, respectively. RESULTS: After exclusion of four patients who discontinued the study, at the 3-year follow-up, 13 (100%) implants survived in the EMD group, and 10 of 12 (83%) in the non-EMD group. At the 5-year follow-up, 11 of 13 (85%) implants in the EMD group and nine of 12 (75%) in the non-EMD group survived. In multivariate modelling, BL changes and EMD treatment were positively associated with implant survival. Similarly, the same trend was seen in univariate analysis. CONCLUSIONS: An exploratory analysis suggests that adjunctive EMD is positively associated with implant survival up to 5 years, but larger studies are needed.
RCT Entities:
OBJECTIVE: To assess the clinical and radiographic outcomes 3 and 5 years after the surgical treatment of peri-implantitis per se or in combination with an enamel matrix derivative (EMD). MATERIALS AND METHODS: At baseline, 29 patients were randomized to surgical treatment with adjunctive EMD or no EMD. One year after the surgical treatment of peri-implantitis, 25 patients remained eligible for survival analyses at the 3- and 5-year follow-up. The primary outcomes were implant loss and bone level (BL) change measured on radiographs, and the secondary outcomes, bleeding on probing, pus and plaque at each implant were analysed in 18 and 14 patients at the 3- and 5-year follow-up, respectively. RESULTS: After exclusion of four patients who discontinued the study, at the 3-year follow-up, 13 (100%) implants survived in the EMD group, and 10 of 12 (83%) in the non-EMD group. At the 5-year follow-up, 11 of 13 (85%) implants in the EMD group and nine of 12 (75%) in the non-EMD group survived. In multivariate modelling, BL changes and EMD treatment were positively associated with implant survival. Similarly, the same trend was seen in univariate analysis. CONCLUSIONS: An exploratory analysis suggests that adjunctive EMD is positively associated with implant survival up to 5 years, but larger studies are needed.
Authors: Maximilian Koch; Maximilian Göltz; Meng Xiangjun; Matthias Karl; Stefan Rosiwal; Andreas Burkovski Journal: J Clin Med Date: 2020-02-09 Impact factor: 4.241