Clin Oral Implants Res. 2025 Sep 8. doi: 10.1111/clr.70036. Online ahead of print.
ABSTRACT
OBJECTIVE: A cross-sectional study was made to evaluate the role of local factors, including surgical, implant, and prosthesis-related parameters, in the presence of peri-implantitis.
METHODS: Consecutive partially edentulous patients with ≥ 1 implant presenting peri-implantitis were included. Clinical and radiographic data were collected to characterize local factors. Overall, 28 site-specific variables were analyzed for peri-implantitis and non-peri-implantitis implants. Simple and multiple logistic regression analyses were performed to explore potential associations. The diagnostic accuracy of those variables that demonstrated statistical significance in the multiple logistic regression analysis was further tested.
RESULTS: In total, 100 patients with 452 implants met the inclusion criteria. Of these, 227 implants (50.2%) were diagnosed with peri-implantitis, while 225 (49.8%) did not present peri-implantitis. The multiple logistic regression analysis demonstrated statistical significance for the following factors: (1) medial implant position within the prosthesis (OR = 3.9) was more prone to develop peri-implantitis; (2) internal Morse taper implant connection was the least likely to develop peri-implantitis (OR = 0.43); (3) mesio-distally centered implants were less prone to exhibit peri-implantitis (OR = 0.46); (4) bucco-lingual centered implants were less prone to exhibit peri-implantitis (OR = 0.29); (5) implants positioned inside (≥ 2 mm) the bony housing were less prone to exhibit peri-implantitis (OR = 0.13); and (6) implants tilted 10°-30° (OR = 5.84) and ≥ 30° (OR = 7.43) were more prone to exhibit peri-implantitis. Moreover, a prediction model based on the aforementioned factors yielded a high level of accuracy.
CONCLUSIONS: Implant malpositioning is a critical factor associated with peri-implantitis.
PMID:40916656 | DOI:10.1111/clr.70036
