Cargando…
The role of foreign body response in peri‐implantitis: What is the evidence?
Historically, there has been broad consensus that osseointegration represents a homeostasis between a titanium dental implant and the surrounding bone, and that the crestal bone loss characteristic of peri‐implantitis is a plaque‐induced inflammatory process. However, this notion has been challenged...
Autores principales: | , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
John Wiley and Sons Inc.
2022
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9804527/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35916872 http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/prd.12456 |
_version_ | 1784862130221088768 |
---|---|
author | Ivanovski, Sašo Bartold, Peter Mark Huang, Yu‐Sheng |
author_facet | Ivanovski, Sašo Bartold, Peter Mark Huang, Yu‐Sheng |
author_sort | Ivanovski, Sašo |
collection | PubMed |
description | Historically, there has been broad consensus that osseointegration represents a homeostasis between a titanium dental implant and the surrounding bone, and that the crestal bone loss characteristic of peri‐implantitis is a plaque‐induced inflammatory process. However, this notion has been challenged over the past decade by proponents of a theory that considers osseointegration an inflammatory process characterized by a foreign body reaction and peri‐implant bone loss as an exacerbation of this inflammatory response. A key difference in these two schools of thought is the perception of the relative importance of dental plaque in the pathogenesis of crestal bone loss around implants, with obvious implications for treatment. This review investigates the evidence for a persistent foreign body reaction at osseointegrated dental implants and its possible role in crestal bone loss characteristic of peri‐implantitis. Further, the role of implant‐related material release within the surrounding tissue, particularly titanium particles and corrosion by‐products, in the establishment and progression in peri‐implantitis is explored. While it is acknowledged that these issues require further investigation, the available evidence suggests that osseointegration is a state of homeostasis between the titanium implant and surrounding tissues, with little evidence that a persistent foreign body reaction is responsible for peri‐implant bone loss after osseointegration is established. Further, there is a lack of evidence for a unidirectional causative role of corrosion by‐products and titanium particles as possible non–plaque related factors in the etiology of peri‐implantitis. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-9804527 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2022 |
publisher | John Wiley and Sons Inc. |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-98045272023-01-03 The role of foreign body response in peri‐implantitis: What is the evidence? Ivanovski, Sašo Bartold, Peter Mark Huang, Yu‐Sheng Periodontol 2000 Review Articles Historically, there has been broad consensus that osseointegration represents a homeostasis between a titanium dental implant and the surrounding bone, and that the crestal bone loss characteristic of peri‐implantitis is a plaque‐induced inflammatory process. However, this notion has been challenged over the past decade by proponents of a theory that considers osseointegration an inflammatory process characterized by a foreign body reaction and peri‐implant bone loss as an exacerbation of this inflammatory response. A key difference in these two schools of thought is the perception of the relative importance of dental plaque in the pathogenesis of crestal bone loss around implants, with obvious implications for treatment. This review investigates the evidence for a persistent foreign body reaction at osseointegrated dental implants and its possible role in crestal bone loss characteristic of peri‐implantitis. Further, the role of implant‐related material release within the surrounding tissue, particularly titanium particles and corrosion by‐products, in the establishment and progression in peri‐implantitis is explored. While it is acknowledged that these issues require further investigation, the available evidence suggests that osseointegration is a state of homeostasis between the titanium implant and surrounding tissues, with little evidence that a persistent foreign body reaction is responsible for peri‐implant bone loss after osseointegration is established. Further, there is a lack of evidence for a unidirectional causative role of corrosion by‐products and titanium particles as possible non–plaque related factors in the etiology of peri‐implantitis. John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2022-08-02 2022-10 /pmc/articles/PMC9804527/ /pubmed/35916872 http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/prd.12456 Text en © 2022 The Authors. Periodontology 2000 published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/This is an open access article under the terms of the http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/) License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited and is not used for commercial purposes. |
spellingShingle | Review Articles Ivanovski, Sašo Bartold, Peter Mark Huang, Yu‐Sheng The role of foreign body response in peri‐implantitis: What is the evidence? |
title | The role of foreign body response in peri‐implantitis: What is the evidence? |
title_full | The role of foreign body response in peri‐implantitis: What is the evidence? |
title_fullStr | The role of foreign body response in peri‐implantitis: What is the evidence? |
title_full_unstemmed | The role of foreign body response in peri‐implantitis: What is the evidence? |
title_short | The role of foreign body response in peri‐implantitis: What is the evidence? |
title_sort | role of foreign body response in peri‐implantitis: what is the evidence? |
topic | Review Articles |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9804527/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35916872 http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/prd.12456 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT ivanovskisaso theroleofforeignbodyresponseinperiimplantitiswhatistheevidence AT bartoldpetermark theroleofforeignbodyresponseinperiimplantitiswhatistheevidence AT huangyusheng theroleofforeignbodyresponseinperiimplantitiswhatistheevidence AT ivanovskisaso roleofforeignbodyresponseinperiimplantitiswhatistheevidence AT bartoldpetermark roleofforeignbodyresponseinperiimplantitiswhatistheevidence AT huangyusheng roleofforeignbodyresponseinperiimplantitiswhatistheevidence |