Prevalence of peri‐implantitis in a sample of HIV‐positive patients

Abstract Objectives This study aimed to assess the prevalence of peri‐implantitis in human immunodeficiency virus (HIV)‐positive patients and the presence of a possible correlation between the immunological profile and serological values, of peri‐implantitis, and of possible differences between all‐...

Descripción completa

Guardado en:
Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Luca Casula, Andrea Poli, Tommaso Clemente, Giulia Artuso, Paolo Capparé, Enrico F. Gherlone
Formato: article
Lenguaje:EN
Publicado: Wiley 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://doaj.org/article/15e1590bd385433eab2e1a330e73db69
Etiquetas: Agregar Etiqueta
Sin Etiquetas, Sea el primero en etiquetar este registro!
id oai:doaj.org-article:15e1590bd385433eab2e1a330e73db69
record_format dspace
spelling oai:doaj.org-article:15e1590bd385433eab2e1a330e73db692021-12-02T12:59:21ZPrevalence of peri‐implantitis in a sample of HIV‐positive patients2057-434710.1002/cre2.469https://doaj.org/article/15e1590bd385433eab2e1a330e73db692021-12-01T00:00:00Zhttps://doi.org/10.1002/cre2.469https://doaj.org/toc/2057-4347Abstract Objectives This study aimed to assess the prevalence of peri‐implantitis in human immunodeficiency virus (HIV)‐positive patients and the presence of a possible correlation between the immunological profile and serological values, of peri‐implantitis, and of possible differences between all‐on‐4 and single crown/bridge prostheses. Subjects and methods This retrospective study included 58 adult HIV‐positive patients (222 implants) with either all‐in‐4 prostheses or single crowns/bridges on at least one dental implant loaded for more than a year who were followed for 3 year (mean follow‐up). Data pertaining to the probing pocket depth (PPD), bleeding on probing, and immunological and systemic profile were collected. Results Patients with single crown/bridge implant rehabilitation showed higher prevalence of peri‐implantitis (34%) than patients with all‐on‐4 rehabilitation (0%) (p = 0.012). Patients with all‐on‐4 rehabilitation were significantly older than those with single crowns/bridges (p = 0.004). Patients with peri‐implantitis had implants for a significantly longer duration than those without (p = 0.001), implying that the probability of peri‐implantitis increases as the age of implant increases. Conclusions The prevalence of peri‐implantitis was 26% in the HIV‐positive patients population. No correlation was found between patients' immunological and serological factors and peri‐implantitis. The most important risk factor for peri‐implantitis and mucositis was implant age.Luca CasulaAndrea PoliTommaso ClementeGiulia ArtusoPaolo CapparéEnrico F. GherloneWileyarticleall‐on‐4HIV‐positive patientsmucositisperi‐implantitisDentistryRK1-715ENClinical and Experimental Dental Research, Vol 7, Iss 6, Pp 1002-1013 (2021)
institution DOAJ
collection DOAJ
language EN
topic all‐on‐4
HIV‐positive patients
mucositis
peri‐implantitis
Dentistry
RK1-715
spellingShingle all‐on‐4
HIV‐positive patients
mucositis
peri‐implantitis
Dentistry
RK1-715
Luca Casula
Andrea Poli
Tommaso Clemente
Giulia Artuso
Paolo Capparé
Enrico F. Gherlone
Prevalence of peri‐implantitis in a sample of HIV‐positive patients
description Abstract Objectives This study aimed to assess the prevalence of peri‐implantitis in human immunodeficiency virus (HIV)‐positive patients and the presence of a possible correlation between the immunological profile and serological values, of peri‐implantitis, and of possible differences between all‐on‐4 and single crown/bridge prostheses. Subjects and methods This retrospective study included 58 adult HIV‐positive patients (222 implants) with either all‐in‐4 prostheses or single crowns/bridges on at least one dental implant loaded for more than a year who were followed for 3 year (mean follow‐up). Data pertaining to the probing pocket depth (PPD), bleeding on probing, and immunological and systemic profile were collected. Results Patients with single crown/bridge implant rehabilitation showed higher prevalence of peri‐implantitis (34%) than patients with all‐on‐4 rehabilitation (0%) (p = 0.012). Patients with all‐on‐4 rehabilitation were significantly older than those with single crowns/bridges (p = 0.004). Patients with peri‐implantitis had implants for a significantly longer duration than those without (p = 0.001), implying that the probability of peri‐implantitis increases as the age of implant increases. Conclusions The prevalence of peri‐implantitis was 26% in the HIV‐positive patients population. No correlation was found between patients' immunological and serological factors and peri‐implantitis. The most important risk factor for peri‐implantitis and mucositis was implant age.
format article
author Luca Casula
Andrea Poli
Tommaso Clemente
Giulia Artuso
Paolo Capparé
Enrico F. Gherlone
author_facet Luca Casula
Andrea Poli
Tommaso Clemente
Giulia Artuso
Paolo Capparé
Enrico F. Gherlone
author_sort Luca Casula
title Prevalence of peri‐implantitis in a sample of HIV‐positive patients
title_short Prevalence of peri‐implantitis in a sample of HIV‐positive patients
title_full Prevalence of peri‐implantitis in a sample of HIV‐positive patients
title_fullStr Prevalence of peri‐implantitis in a sample of HIV‐positive patients
title_full_unstemmed Prevalence of peri‐implantitis in a sample of HIV‐positive patients
title_sort prevalence of peri‐implantitis in a sample of hiv‐positive patients
publisher Wiley
publishDate 2021
url https://doaj.org/article/15e1590bd385433eab2e1a330e73db69
work_keys_str_mv AT lucacasula prevalenceofperiimplantitisinasampleofhivpositivepatients
AT andreapoli prevalenceofperiimplantitisinasampleofhivpositivepatients
AT tommasoclemente prevalenceofperiimplantitisinasampleofhivpositivepatients
AT giuliaartuso prevalenceofperiimplantitisinasampleofhivpositivepatients
AT paolocappare prevalenceofperiimplantitisinasampleofhivpositivepatients
AT enricofgherlone prevalenceofperiimplantitisinasampleofhivpositivepatients
_version_ 1718393550961377280