Introduction: Once known that treatment of the inflammation around dental implants is unpredictable and that the prevalence of peri-implant mucositis (PM) is high, it is very important to focus on identifying the risk factors and indices for taking good control of them. As to the influence of keratinized mucosa (KM) around dental implants as a risk index, recent research shows weak evidence, while recommending further investigations. Aim: The aim of the study was to assess the influence of keratinized mucosa and attached mucosa (AM) around dental implants on the response to the treatment of PM. Materials and methods: The experimental study was conducted from May 2015 to September 2016, in Bucharest, on a sample of 31 patients with a total number of 85 dental implants diagnosed with PM. The patients were assessed for risk indicators and clinical parameters characteristic to PM. The treatment consisted of specific mechanical debridement and additional measures at implant level. The patients were re-evaluated 1 and 3 months after the treatment. Results and discussion: Remission of PM was achieved after 1 month in 38.9% of the implants (N=33) and in 63.5% of them (N=54) 3 months after the treatment. With regard to the KM, after 1 month healing was obtained at 42.5% (N=31) of the implants with more than 2 mm of KM on the buccal side, and at 60% (N=6) of the implants with this width on the lingual side. Comparatively, only 16.7% (N=2) of the implants with 1-2 mm of KM on the buccal side and 5% (N=1) with this width on the lingual side were healed. As to the AM, after 1 month none of the implants that lack AM was healed. Healing was recorded in 40% (N=33) of the implants with AM on the buccal side and in 41.2% (N=7) with AM on the lingual side. After 3 months, healing was achieved in 69.9% (N=51) of the implants that had more than 2 mm of KM on the buccal side and in 86.7% (N=13) with this width on the lingual side. In comparison, only 25% (N=2) of the implants with 1-2 mm of KM on the buccal side and 20% (N=4) of the implants with this width on the lingual side were healed. Regarding the AM, after 3 months, healing was obtained for 70.8% (N=51) of the implants with AM on the buccal side and for 88.2% (N=15) with AM on the lingual side, comparatively with 23.1% (N=10) of the implants with no AM on the buccal side and with 11.1% (N=2) without AM on the lingual side. Conclusions: The current research shows a statistically significant higher number of cases where healing was obtained when keratinized mucosa exceeded 2 mm and in the presence of AM.
Keywords:- attached mucosa.
- keratinized mucosa
- peri-implant mucositis