Stephen T Chen, Alberto Monje, Franz J Strauss, Frank Schwarz, Andrea Roccuzzo, Irena Sailer, Dennis Tarnow, France Lambert, Sascha Jovanovic, Daniel Buser
{"title":"Peri-implantitis-Is it mainly a clinician-initiated complication of implant therapy?","authors":"Stephen T Chen, Alberto Monje, Franz J Strauss, Frank Schwarz, Andrea Roccuzzo, Irena Sailer, Dennis Tarnow, France Lambert, Sascha Jovanovic, Daniel Buser","doi":"10.1111/prd.70051","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Aim: </strong>The high prevalence of peri-implantitis is concerning, with a growing consensus that the majority of cases are complications initiated by clinician-related errors rather than classic pathology. A primary predisposing factor for peri-implantitis is exposure of the micro-rough implant surfaces to the peri-implant sulcus after treatment.</p><p><strong>Objectives: </strong>To identify surgical/prosthetic factors causing micro-rough surface exposure and advocate for prevention and evidence-based protocols.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>This paper reviews evidence linking surgical and prosthetic errors to micro-rough surface exposure to the sulcus and subsequent peri-implantitis development.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Surgical factors for surface exposure include malposition, avascular necrosis, and incomplete bone regeneration of peri-implant defects. Prosthetic factors include cement remnants and wide prosthetic emergence angles. Clinician-influenceable co-factors-including patient compliance, history of periodontitis, uncontrolled systemic factors/habits, lack of keratinized mucosa, prosthetic misfit, overcontoured/uncleansable prostheses, failure to detect early bone loss or mucosal changes, and inadequate maintenance-contribute to the initiation and progression of peri-implantitis once micro-rough surfaces are exposed.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Most peri-implantitis cases are preventable complications. Professional education and research must prioritize identifying clinician-related errors and adherence to foundational treatment principles. This requires a paradigm shift toward a complication-based model of peri-implantitis.</p><p><strong>Clinical relevance: </strong>To reduce the risk of peri-implantitis, clinicians should avoid clinical errors that lead to exposure of the micro-rough implant surface. Hybrid surface designs and subcrestal micro-rough surface placement should be considered as safety buffers. Success depends on meticulous diagnostics and planning, proper surgical/prosthetic execution, cleansable prosthesis design, and proactive maintenance to detect early bone loss and soft tissue changes.</p>","PeriodicalId":19736,"journal":{"name":"Periodontology 2000","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":17.8000,"publicationDate":"2026-06-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Periodontology 2000","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/prd.70051","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Aim: The high prevalence of peri-implantitis is concerning, with a growing consensus that the majority of cases are complications initiated by clinician-related errors rather than classic pathology. A primary predisposing factor for peri-implantitis is exposure of the micro-rough implant surfaces to the peri-implant sulcus after treatment.
Objectives: To identify surgical/prosthetic factors causing micro-rough surface exposure and advocate for prevention and evidence-based protocols.
Materials and methods: This paper reviews evidence linking surgical and prosthetic errors to micro-rough surface exposure to the sulcus and subsequent peri-implantitis development.
Results: Surgical factors for surface exposure include malposition, avascular necrosis, and incomplete bone regeneration of peri-implant defects. Prosthetic factors include cement remnants and wide prosthetic emergence angles. Clinician-influenceable co-factors-including patient compliance, history of periodontitis, uncontrolled systemic factors/habits, lack of keratinized mucosa, prosthetic misfit, overcontoured/uncleansable prostheses, failure to detect early bone loss or mucosal changes, and inadequate maintenance-contribute to the initiation and progression of peri-implantitis once micro-rough surfaces are exposed.
Conclusions: Most peri-implantitis cases are preventable complications. Professional education and research must prioritize identifying clinician-related errors and adherence to foundational treatment principles. This requires a paradigm shift toward a complication-based model of peri-implantitis.
Clinical relevance: To reduce the risk of peri-implantitis, clinicians should avoid clinical errors that lead to exposure of the micro-rough implant surface. Hybrid surface designs and subcrestal micro-rough surface placement should be considered as safety buffers. Success depends on meticulous diagnostics and planning, proper surgical/prosthetic execution, cleansable prosthesis design, and proactive maintenance to detect early bone loss and soft tissue changes.
期刊介绍:
Periodontology 2000 is a series of monographs designed for periodontists and general practitioners interested in periodontics. The editorial board selects significant topics and distinguished scientists and clinicians for each monograph. Serving as a valuable supplement to existing periodontal journals, three monographs are published annually, contributing specialized insights to the field.