ライフサイエンスコーパス: peri-implantitis

1 atment outcomes after surgical management of peri-implantitis.

2 ated as phase I therapy for the treatment of peri-implantitis.

3 cy of different surgical approaches to treat peri-implantitis.

4 , and sclerostin as prognostic biomarkers in peri-implantitis.

5 English that applied surgeries for treating peri-implantitis.

6 applied detoxification methods for treating peri-implantitis.

7 identify potential prognostic biomarkers of peri-implantitis.

8 the other treatment modalities for managing peri-implantitis.

9 dy sample included patients with and without peri-implantitis.

10 ant mucosa of both patients with and without peri-implantitis.

11 sk groups is essential to reduce the risk of peri-implantitis.

12 ss of reconstructive procedures for treating peri-implantitis.

13 -implant mucositis, or chronic periodontitis/peri-implantitis.

14 40% of the implants showed mucositis and 10% peri-implantitis.

15 of mucositis, and a 14 times greater risk of peri-implantitis.

16 was associated with 86% fewer conditions of peri-implantitis.

17 risk of developing peri-implant mucositis or peri-implantitis.

18 association between titanium dissolution and peri-implantitis.

19 for studies of initiation and progression of peri-implantitis.

20 o develop a novel rat model of polymicrobial peri-implantitis.

21 implants include peri-implant mucositis and peri-implantitis.

22 f the disease to assist in the prevention of peri-implantitis.

23 rats were used for the study of experimental peri-implantitis.

24 tification of microorganisms associated with peri-implantitis.

25 cted from healthy implants and implants with peri-implantitis.

26 ws for bacterial invasion, which may lead to peri-implantitis.

27 yromonas gingivalis (Pg), in the etiology of peri-implantitis.

28 in resolution of inflammation could prevent peri-implantitis.

29 ful in the early prevention and treatment of peri-implantitis.

30 8) 3-month supportive care for treatment of peri-implantitis.

31 ogens Pg, Pi, Tf, and Fn are associated with peri-implantitis.

32 up to 10% of implants must be removed due to peri-implantitis.

33 ples from healthy implants and implants with peri-implantitis.

34 may be proposed for use in the treatment of peri-implantitis.

35 nd Campylobacter rectus with the etiology of peri-implantitis.

36 suggests the association of Eubacterium with peri-implantitis.

37 ies do not seem to play an important role in peri-implantitis.

38 transitional phase during the development of peri-implantitis.

39 ngs in soft tissue biopsies of implants with peri-implantitis.

40 ost-effectiveness of preventing and treating peri-implantitis.

41 en oral diseases: peri-implant mucositis and peri-implantitis.

42 -implant health, peri-implant mucositis, and peri-implantitis.

43 diseases, such as peri-implant mucositis and peri-implantitis.

44 cacious treatment modality for patients with peri-implantitis?

45 ts of prognosis, including the following: 1) peri-implantitis; 2) etiology; 3) awareness; 4) attitude

46 of knowledge, awareness, and attitudes about peri-implantitis; 2) information provided by dentists/sp

47 cted from 164 participants (52 patients with peri-implantitis, 54 with mucositis, and 58 with healthy

48 n were frequent findings among patients with peri-implantitis (64%), and 32% reported that living wit

49 les revealed nearly complete coverage of the peri-implantitis-affected parts by the graft material.

50 Peri-implantitis-affected surface conditioning with citr

51 devoid of any bone particle adhesion to the peri-implantitis-affected surfaces.

52 ded clot adhesion to citric acid-conditioned peri-implantitis-affected surfaces.

53 n four patients and one in six implants have peri-implantitis after 11 years.

54 Peri-implantitis, an inflammation caused by biofilm form

55 Submucosal plaque from 20 implants with peri-implantitis and 20 healthy implants was collected w

56 The associated microbiota resembles that of peri-implantitis and destructive periodontal disease in

57 oss around teeth increased the occurrence of peri-implantitis and implant loss.

58 have a poor understanding and perception of peri-implantitis and its impact.

59 s in plaque associated with ligature-induced peri-implantitis and ligature-induced periodontitis were

60 sures were implant success, implant failure (peri-implantitis and loss of osseointegration), marginal

61 Comparisons between peri-implantitis and mucositis demonstrated significantl

62 Again, few differences were detected between peri-implantitis and mucositis.

63 ifferential diagnoses compared with marginal peri-implantitis and other implant-related conditions.

64 e odds ratios (95% confidence intervals) for peri-implantitis and peri-implant mucositis for cement-

65 Biomarker levels were similar in peri-implantitis and periodontitis groups (P >0.05).

66 ociated with the progression of experimental peri-implantitis and periodontitis induced concurrently

67 ociated with the progression of experimental peri-implantitis and periodontitis occurring concurrentl

68 t regimens may require revisions to minimize peri-implantitis and prevent bone loss.

69 hy peri-implant conditions and patients with peri-implantitis and to explore the influence of various

70 y is to investigate the treatment outcome of peri-implantitis and to identify factors influencing the

71 ble to bleeding upon probing, periodontitis, peri-implantitis, and tooth loss.

72 h (58 implants [19 healthy, 20 mucositis, 19 peri-implantitis] and 39 natural teeth [19 healthy, 12 g

73 A large number of treatments for peri-implantitis are available, but their cost-effective

74 d with subgingival plaque from patients with peri-implantitis are evaluated in terms of: 1) plaque an

75 The main bacterial species associated with peri-implantitis are recognized as periodontal pathogens

76 s demonstrated to influence the incidence of peri-implantitis at implant but not patient level.

77 ht of evidence for microorganisms related to peri-implantitis based on results of association studies

78 he decontamination of titanium implants with peri-implantitis, based on their antimicrobial effect.

79 nd in increased count/abundance/frequency in peri-implantitis belonged to Bacteria domain and viruses

80 Thirty-six human peri-implantitis biopsies were analyzed using light micr

81 and management of peri-implant mucositis and peri-implantitis by periodontists in the United States.

82 nsufficient for a clear conclusion regarding peri-implantitis cases.

83 samples were collected from 85 patients with peri-implantitis (cases) and from 69 patients with only

84 nical outcomes of a concept for non-surgical peri-implantitis combining stepwise mechanical debrideme

85 nical outcomes of a concept for non-surgical peri-implantitis combining stepwise mechanical debrideme

86 microbial profiles or entire microbiomes of peri-implantitis compared with healthy implants or perio

87 ed in submucosal plaque around implants with peri-implantitis compared with healthy implants, indicat

88 ere significantly increased in patients with peri-implantitis compared with patients with healthy per

89 frequent finding and that the prevalence of peri-implantitis correlates with loading time.

90 t in comparison to conventional treatment of peri-implantitis could not be identified.

91 sue breakdown and at regeneration of bone in peri-implantitis defects.

92 Forty hopeless implants with peri-implantitis designated for removal were included in

93 Peri-implantitis did not differ significantly from mucos

94 cause peri-implant mucositis may progress to peri-implantitis, effective treatment resulting in resol

95 ory of periodontal disease were obtained for peri-implantitis for both implant and patient levels.

96 d Td levels were significantly higher in the peri-implantitis group (P <0.05).

97 concentration of titanium was higher in the peri-implantitis group compared with the group without p

98 Implants with peri-implantitis harbored significantly higher mean leve

99 At the present time, peri-implantitis has become a global burden that occurs

100 uring the past decade, and the prevalence of peri-implantitis has increased.

101 diseases, namely peri-implant mucositis and peri-implantitis, have been extensively studied.

102 c oral infections, such as periodontitis and peri-implantitis, have complex etiology and pathogenesis

103 6-microm) laser in the surgical treatment of peri-implantitis; however, its use may be promising.

104 is to evaluate the prevalence of mucositis, peri-implantitis, implant success, and survival in parti

105 The material included 382 implants with peri-implantitis in 150 patients.

106 P patients, mucositis was present in 56% and peri-implantitis in 26% of the implants.

107 /=2 PIMT/year seems to be crucial to prevent peri-implantitis in healthy patients.

108 ntal implants, which suggests corrosion, and peri-implantitis in humans.

109 Frequency of peri-implantitis in the survey was 17.8% at the particip

110 the prevalence of peri-implant mucositis and peri-implantitis in their practices is up to 25% but is

111 ositive anaerobic rod has been identified in peri-implantitis, in endodontic infections, and in patie

112 Peri-implantitis is a complex polymicrobial biofilm-indu

113 Peri-implantitis is an inflammatory condition that can l

114 Peri-implantitis is associated with younger ages and dia

115 uvant antibiotic therapy in the treatment of peri-implantitis is not well understood.

116 knowledge, a standard protocol for treating peri-implantitis is not yet established.

117 duction of these materials and their role in peri-implantitis is unknown.

118 ve abundance of Eubacterium was increased at peri-implantitis locations, and co-occurrence analysis r

119 Increasing preclinical data suggest that peri-implantitis microbiota not only triggers an inflamm

120 ere not detected continuously as part of the peri-implantitis microbiota.

121 ncluding surgical trauma, occlusal overload, peri-implantitis, microgap, biologic width, and implant

122 (n = 10), peri-implant mucositis (n = 8) and peri-implantitis (n = 6) sites using pyrosequencing of t

123 ntitis group compared with the group without peri-implantitis; no traces of titanium were observed in

124 of the implants and 48% of the patients, and peri-implantitis occurred in 16% of the implants and 26%

125 If peri-implantitis occurred, 11 treatment strategies (non-

126 s substantially associated with frequency of peri-implantitis (OR = 0.13, P = 0.01).

127 ic review assesses microbiologic profiles of peri-implantitis, periodontitis, and healthy implants ba

128 clinical questions: 1) whether patients with peri-implantitis (PP) present higher prevalence of any s

129 dies have implicated prostaglandin E2 in the peri-implantitis process, opening the possibility to man

130 The prevalence of peri-implantitis ranges between 15% and 20% after 10 y,

131 Peri-implantitis represents a disruption of the biocompa

132 Peri-implantitis represents a heterogeneous mixed infect

133 etiologic factors associated with retrograde peri-implantitis (RPI) and potential treatment options h

134 Although retrograde peri-implantitis (RPI) is not a common sequela of dental

135 significantly higher values of sclerostin in peri-implantitis samples.

136 Patients with peri-implantitis showed statistically significantly bett

137 Peri-implantitis sites were also colonized by uncultivab

138 irochete levels were significantly higher at peri-implantitis sites when compared with levels at peri

139 was correlated with Prevotella intermedia in peri-implantitis sites, which suggests the association o

140 oorganisms were not found very frequently in peri-implantitis sites.

141 om plaque samples obtained from experimental peri-implantitis sites.

142 ficantly with probing depth and bone loss at peri-implantitis sites.

143 ermedius/nigrescens were often identified at peri-implantitis sites.

144 Postoperative complications were peri-implantitis (six cases) and osseointegration losses

145 in was proposed for use in periodontitis and peri-implantitis therapy due to its bone-supportive effe

146 The effectiveness of the peri-implantitis therapy was impaired by severe periodon

147 months of follow-up in >/= 10 patients with peri-implantitis treated with lasers were included.

148 nin as a promising drug in periodontitis and peri-implantitis treatment.

149 icles evaluated the microbiologic profile of peri-implantitis versus healthy implants or periodontiti

150 Risk of peri-implantitis was assumed to be affected by SIT and t

151 Peri-implantitis was defined as presence of pocket depth

152 Peri-implantitis was defined as radiographic bone loss o

153 Peri-implantitis was defined as radiographic bone loss o

154 lant mucositis and preventing development of peri-implantitis was either provided or not.

155 At the LM level, the inflammatory lesion of peri-implantitis was in most cases a mixture of subacute

156 ere connected to prostheses and experimental peri-implantitis was induced by ceasing scaling procedur

157 icipants and 30.7% of implants, and those of peri-implantitis were 18.8% of participants and 9.6% of

158 animal studies applying lasers for treating peri-implantitis were also included.

159 dontitis, healthy implants, or implants with peri-implantitis were colonized by periodontal microorga

160 tis comprising 164 screw-typed implants with peri-implantitis were included.

161 and a total of 164 screw-typed implants with peri-implantitis were included.

162 Putative pathogens associated with peri-implantitis were present at a moderate relative abu

163 Individuals with peri-implantitis were twice as likely to report a proble

164 Overall, 11.9% of the participants had peri-implantitis, whereas 68.9% had peri-implant mucosit

165 the first bone-to-implant contact, extensive peri-implantitis with advanced bone resorption, and exte

166 QoL was impaired by the presence of peri-implantitis with high level of concern and low leve

167 d GAgP are more susceptible to mucositis and peri-implantitis, with lower implant survival and succes