Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
PURPOSE: This study aimed to report implant failures before and after peri-implantitis surgery (P-IS) and to compare the pattern of implant failures with in untreated at-risk patients during the same period. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of 5628 untreated at-risk patients (7240 jaws) and 207 consecutively patients treated with P-IS (212 jaws) were included in two groups. Implants were placed and followed-up between 1986 and 2018. Cumulative survival rates (CSR) for patients treated with P-IS after 2003 were calculated before and after P-IS and compared with those for nontreated patients. RESULTS: The overall 15-year CSR was 91.2% (CI 95%; 90.5%-91.9%) and 68.5%, (CI 95%, 62.1%-75.5%) for untreated patients at risk and P-IS patients, respectively (P < .05). The 10-year CSR (baseline 1 year after implant surgery) was 97.2% (CI 95%, 95.2%-100%) for treated patients before P-IS which was comparable with that for untreated patients: 95.4% (CI 95%, 94.8%-97.7%). The corresponding 10-year CSR for P-IS patients after surgery was significantly lower (71.6%: CI 95%, 63.1%-81.3% (P < .05)). CONCLUSION: CSR for patients/jaws without implant failures was comparable between untreated and treated P-IS patients before, but lower for P-IS patients after P-IS (P < .05). A negative effect of P-IS on implant survival after treatment cannot be disregarded.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Jemt et al. (2020) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: