Home | deutsch  | Legals | Data Protection | Sitemap | KIT
Head of Department

Prof. Dr. Thomas Schwartz

+49-721-608-2-6802
+49-721-608-2-6858
E-Mail

 

Impact of dental cement on the peri-implant biofilm-microbial comparison of two different cements in an in vivo observational study

Impact of dental cement on the peri-implant biofilm-microbial comparison of two different cements in an in vivo observational study
chair:

Korsch, M. / Marten, S.M. / Walther, W. /  Vital, M. / Pieper, D.H. / Dötsch, A. (2018)

place:

Clin Implant Dent Relat Res, 2018, doi: 10.1111/cid.12650

Date: August 2018

Abstract

Background: The type of cement used in cemented fixed implant-supported restorations influ-
ences formation of undetected excess cement and composition of the peri-implant biofilm.
Excess cement and dysbiosis of the biofilm involve the risk of peri-implant inflammation.
Purpose: The aim of the study was to investigate the impact of two different cements on the
peri-implant biofilm and inflammation.
Materials and Methods: In an observational study, the suprastructures of 34 patients with
cemented fixed implant-supported restorations were revised. In 20 patients, a methacrylate
cement (Premier Implant cement [PIC]) and in 14 patients, a zinc oxide eugenol cement (Temp
Bond [TB]) were used. After revision, TB was used for recementation. During revision and
follow-up after 1 year, microbial samples were obtained.
Results: Excess cement was found in 12 (60%) of the 20 patients with PIC. Suppuration was
observed in two (25%) implants with PIC without excess cement (PIC) and in all 12 (100%)
implants with PIC and excess cement (PIC+). Implants cemented with TB had neither excess
cement nor suppuration. The taxonomic analysis of the microbial samples revealed an accumula-
tion of periodontal pathogens in the PIC patients independent of the presence of excess
cement. Significantly, fewer oral pathogens occurred in patients with TB compared to patients
with PIC. TB was used in all cases (PIC and TB) for recementation. In the follow-up check,
suppuration was not found around any of the implants with PIC, only around one implant with
PIC+ and around one implant with TB. Bacterial species associated with severe periodontal
infections that were abundant in PIC and PIC+ samples before the revision were reduced after
1 year to levels found in the TB samples.
Conclusions: The revision and recementation with TB had a positive effect on the peri-implant
biofilm in cases with PIC. The cementation of suprastructures on implants with TB is an alterna-
tive method to be considered.