Evaluation of Keratinized Tissue at Peri-Implant Mucosa and Free Gingival Graft Application: Case Series

  1. Home
  2. Articles

Evaluation of Keratinized Tissue at Peri-Implant Mucosa and Free Gingival Graft Application: Case Series

   

Emine Pirim Gorgun1*, Nilufer Altunbas1,  Mustafa Kemal Erenler1

1Cumhuriyet University, Faculty of Dentistry, Department of Periodontology, Sivas, Turkey

*Corresponding author: Emine Pirim Gorgun, Cumhuriyet University, Faculty of Dentistry, Department of Periodontology, Sivas, Turkey

Citation: Gorgun EP, Altunbas N, Erenler MK. (2020) Evaluation of Keratinized Tissue at Peri-Implant Mucosa and Free Gingival Graft Application: Case Series. J Oral Med and Dent Res. 1(1):1-7.

Received: July 5, 2020 | Published: July 20, 2020

Copyright© 2020 genesis pub by AlHayyan WA, et al. CC BY-NC-ND 4.0 DEED. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-Non Commercial-No Derivatives 4.0 International License., This allows others distribute, remix, tweak, and build upon the work, even commercially, as long as they credit the authors for the original creation.

DOI: https://doi.org/10.52793/JOMDR.2020.1(1)-04

Abstract

Abstract

In recent years, for the restoration of lost teeth, dental implants have been used instead of fixed or removable prosthesis that are supported by neighboring teeth. Some experimental and clinical studies have shown that the absence of the keratinized tissue on peri-implant area, that effects the preservation of periodontal health. Lack of the peri-implant keratinized tissue plays a critical role in the accumulation of bacterial plaque around the dental implants, risen risk of peri-implant inflammation and contributes to implant failure. In this case series, it is aimed to find ideal prosthesis soft tissue compliance by applying free gingival graft that is procedure of peri-implant plastic surgery at dental implants surround placed in the mandibula anterior region where there isn’t sufficient keratinized tissue.

Keywords

Free gingival graft; Peri-implant plastic surgery; Dental implant; Keratinized tissue

Summary

In recent years, for the restoration of missing teeth, implants were used instead of the fixed or removable prosthesis supported by neighboring teeth. Peri-implant keratinized tissue deficiency is a critical neuroloarnacular and implant failure contributed to the enhancement of bacterial-accumulation-implant inflammatory disease around the dental implants. In this case, the ideal prosthesis-soft tissue was applied by applying the dental-implant plastic cerrahypyrocedural anesthetic diaphragm in dental implants placed in the mandibular anterior region where there is not enough keratinized tissue.

Introduction

For the restoration of lost teeth in recent years, dental implants have been used instead of fixed or removable prosthesis that are supported by neighboring teeth [1]. However, the preservation and health of the peri-implant soft tissue is required for the longevity of dental implants [2] and prosthesis. The soft tissue healing following implant surgery may result in the formation of a border tissue composed of either keratinized or non-keratinized mucosa [3].

Keratinized tissue is beneficial for healthy peri-implant mucosa. Lack of the peri-implant keratinized tissue plays a critical role in the accumulation of bacterial plaque around the dental implants, risen risk of peri-implant inflammation and contributes to implant failure[4-6] Some  experimental and clinical studies have shown that the absence of the keratinized tissue on peri-implant area, that effects the preservation of periodontal health [7].

In spite of that, little is known about the affect of keratinized mucosa (KM) dimension around implants on the hard and soft tissue health. Recent studies showed that plaque accumulation and mucosal inflammation were meaningfully higher around implants with KM < 2 mm.[8] In the same way , it was reported that there was a negative correlation between KM and mucosal recession[9] and that increased width of KM is related to lower alveolar bone loss.[10] More recently, Zigdon and Machtei [6] reported that a thick mucosa (≥1 mm) was related to lesser mucosal recession compared with a thin mucosa (≤1 mm).So that, a task of Working Group 1 of the Osteology Foundation Consensus Meeting was to widely evaluate the effects soft tissue augmentation procedures on peri-implant health or disease [11].

Keratinized Tissue

1. It is expected That plaque control is better relived in the presence of >2 mm of keratinized tissue.

2. When increasing the zone of keratinized tissue is requested around an implant, the clinician should think of performing a free gingival graft.In this case series, it is aimed to find ideal prosthesis–soft tissue compliance by applying free gingival graft that is procedure of peri-implant plastic surgery at dental implant surround placed in the mandibula anterior region where there is not sufficient keratinized tissue.

Case Reports

Case 1: Dental implant treatment was performed in the surgical policlinic for a 35 year old, nonsmoking, female patient with lost teeth 31 and 41 and was directed to the periodontology  policlinic before prosthetic restoration. The patient complained of increased tension and pain with localized lip movements in the lower jaw. Intraoral and radiographic examination revealed a shallow vestibule depth in the anterior mandibula, high frenilum attachment, inadequate keratinized tissue thickness around the implants and approximately 2mm gingival recession around the implant placed in the tooth 41 region. Free gingival graft obtained from palatal donor region under local anesthesia was applied to the peri-implant region and stabilized.

Case 2: Dental implant treatment was performed in the surgical policlinic for a 56 year old, no-nsmoking, female patient with lost teeth 33 and 43 and was directed to the periodontology policlinic before prosthetic restoration. Intraoral and radiographic examination revealed a shallow vestibule depth in the anterior mandibula, inadequate keratinized tissue thickness around the implant placed in the tooth 33 region. Free gingival graft obtained from palatal donor region under local anesthesia was applied to the peri-implant region and stabilized.

Operation Descriptions

Initially, locally anesthesia performed with articainhidroclorur 2% associated with epinephrine 1: 100,000 (Maxicaine fort-New DFL Ind. e Com. S.A., Rio de Janeiro, Brazil). Then, a horizontal incision is made in the interdental papillae at the level of the peri-implanter marginal tissue [12,13] two vertical incisions are performed to extend to the alveolar mucosa. The half-thickness flap is dissected up to the apical boundaries of the vertical incision and removed.

The free gingival graft [14,15] was obtained from the palate area at a distance of about 2mm from the teeth. The graft was sutured to the recipient area in a close contact with the periosteum bed. As resorbable suture material (Pegelak, polyglycolide-co-lactide Dogsan Surgical Suture, Istanbul, Turkey, USA) was used.  Palate donor site sutured with, 4-0 silk suture (Silk, Cetin Surgical Suture, Adana, Turkey, TR) for hemostasis and clot promote stabilization. The recipient area was covered with surgical cement (coe-pack) and stabilized on mandibular teeth. As post operative patient care, rinsing 0.12% chlorhexidine twice in the morning and evening for 2 weeks, 1000 mg amoxicillin twice daily for 7 days. In case of possible pain, 275 mg naproxen sodium was prescribed. Surgical cement was removed on the 14th day. Sutures of donor and recipient areas were removed on the 14th day. Wound areas healed without any discomfort after the surgery. Oral motivation training was repeated. The patient was invited to the 1st and 3rd month follow-ups. After a 3-month follow-up period, a thickness and a 3 mm increase in the height of the keratinized mucosa were observed, promoting good peri-implant health, facilitating hygiene procedures and complaining of painful symptoms in the period implant area.

Figure 1a, 1b, 1c: Preoperation, Postop. 14 day, Postop. 3 month of Case 1, respectively.

Figure 2a, 2b, 2c: Preoperation, Postop. , Postop. 3 month of Case 2, respectively.

Discussion

Soft tissue procedures around natural teeth can be used in two terms: mucogingival surgery and periodontal plastic surgery. These operations can be performed around the teeth as well as in the implant areas. It is carried out in the form of soft tissue growth or reduction procedures. The term “peri-implant plastic surgery (PiPS)” can be defined as a group of procedures aimed at correcting acquired or pathologically derived aesthetic and / or functional, peri-implant soft and hard tissue deformities.

As with natural teeth, gingival recession may occur on the buccal side of the implants, which cause aesthetic and functional problems. In cases where there is no interproximal tissue loss, provided that the implant grooves are not exposed, soft tissue augmentation procedures can be used, as with natural teeth, to improve the “peri-implant mucosa phenotype” [18]. This operation in the peri-implant mucosa regions can provide a mechanical barrier of the area, thus reducing potential discomfort associated with tooth brushing thanks to the KT gain.Four different time points can be distinguished to increase the mucosal thickness around CM or dental implants: [16]

(a) Before implant placement,

(b) During implant placement,

(c) Second place After exposing the implant (healing head)

(d) Forward-looking protocol after re-entry

While the first three protocols have more predictable clinical outcomes, the prospective protocol may face aesthetic problems or complications such as mucositis or periimplantitis [17-19]. It has been reported in the literature that adequate CM for peri-implant health is ≥ 2 mm and that when CM <2 mm, problems may affect peri-implant health and cause peri-implant mucocytis / peri-implantitis [3,5,20,21].

Free gingival graft is a successful and predictable technique that can prevent hard and soft tissue problems that develop after implant surgery [22,23]. This procedure can be performed before implant placement, as well as during the second surgical stage of the implants or after the last prosthesis has been placed [22].When the combination of autogenous grafts and apically positioned flap (APF) / Vestibuloplasty (V) was compared with those without any surgical procedure, it was observed that the width of the keratinized mucosa (CM) was significantly increased. [3,5,21]. The use of autogenous or allogeneic grafts in addition to APF / V was found to be superior to autogenous grafts. Wei et al. Conducted a study comparing the efficacy of ADM and free gingival graft to increase the adherent gingival width of [24,25]. The results showed that the tissue formed in the ADM treated region was not parallel to any known mucosa and was more similar to scar tissue.

Conclusion

With the free gingival graft applied to the peri-implant mucosa, the patient’s complaints were resolved and environment of reduced risk was provided for the long-term success as providing an adequate keratinized tissue and vestibular depth before prosthesis restoration.

Acknowledgements

None.

Conflict of Interest

The authors deny any conflicts of interest related to this study.

Orcid IDs of Authors

  1. Emine Pirim Gorgun: 0000-0002-8867-1663
  2. Nilufer Altunbas: 0000-0002-6098-2144
  3. Mustafa Kemal Erenler: 0000-0002-9258-3404

Refrences

  1. Branemark PI. (1977) Osseointegrated implants in the treatment of the edentulous jaw. Experience from a 10-year period. Scand. J Plast Reconstr Surg Suppl. 16:1-132.
  2. Kim BS, Kim YK, Yun PY, Yi YJ, Lee HJ, et al. (2009) Evaluation of peri-implant tissue response according to the presence of keratinized mucosa. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod. 107(3):e24-8.
  3. Wennström JL, Derks J. (2012) Is there a need for keratinized mucosa around implants to maintain health and tissue stability?. Clin Oral Implants Res. 23:136-46.
  4. Ericsson I, Lindhe J. (1993) Probing depth at implants and teeth: an experimental study in the dog. J Clin Periodontol. 20(9):623-7.
  5. Lin GH, Chan HL, Wang HL. (2013) The significance of keratinized mucosa on implant health: a systematic review. J Periodont. 84(12):1755-67.
  6. Zigdon H, Machtei EE. (2008) The dimensions of keratinized mucosa around implants affect clinical and immunological parameters. Clini Oral Implants Res. 19(4):387-92.
  7. Sohn JY, Park JC, Cho KS, Kim CS. (2014) Simultaneous placement of an interpositional free gingival graft with nonsubmerged implant placement. J Periodontal Implan Sci. 44(2):94-9.
  8. Chung DM, Oh TJ, Shotwell JL, Misch CE, Wang HL. (2006) Significance of keratinized mucosa in maintenance of dental implants with different surfaces. J Periodontol. 77(8):1410-20.
  9. Artzi Z, Carmeli G, Kozlovsky A. (2006) A distinguishable observation between survival and success rate outcome of hydroxyapatite‐coated implants in 5-10 years in function. Clinic Oral Implants Res. 17(1):85-93.
  10. Bouri Jr A, Bissada N, Al-Zahrani MS, Faddoul F, Nouneh I. (2008) Width of keratinized gingiva and the health status of the supporting tissues around dental implants. Int J Oral & Maxillofac Implants. 23(2).
  11. Giannobile WV, Jung RE, Schwarz F. (2018) Evidence‐based knowledge on the aesthetics and maintenance of peri‐implant soft tissues: Osteology Foundation Consensus Report Part 1-Effects of soft tissue augmentation procedures on the maintenance of peri‐implant soft tissue health. Clin Oral Implants Res. 29:7-10.
  12. Miller Jr PD. (1985) Root coverage using the free soft tissue autograft following citric acid application. III. A successful and predictalbe procedure in areas of deep-wide recession. Int J Periodont Rest Dent. 5:14-36.
  13. Miller P. (1982) Root coverage using a free soft tissue autogenous following citric acid application. Int J Periodont Rest Dent. 2:65.
  14. Langer B, Langer L. (1990) Overlapped flap: a surgical modification for implant fixture installation. Int J Periodont Rest Dent. 10(3):208.
  15. Langer B, Sullivan D. (1989) Osseointegration: its impact on the interrelationship of periodontics and restorative dentistry: Part I. Int J Periodont Rest Dent. 9(2):84-105.
  16. Hürzeler MB, Weng D. (1996) Periimplant tissue management: optimal timing for an aesthetic result. Practical Periodontics and Aesthetic Dentistry: Ppad. 8(9):857-69.
  17. Bassetti M, Kaufmann R, Salvi GE, Sculean A, Bassetti R. (2015) Soft tissue grafting to improve the attached mucosa at dental implants: A review of the literature and proposal of a decision tree. Quintessence Int. 46(6):499-510.
  18. Shibli JA, d'Avila S, Marcantonio Jr E. (2004) Connective tissue graft to correct peri-implant soft tissue margin: A clinical report. The Journal of prosthetic dentistry. 91(2):119-22.
  19. Yan JJ, Tsai AY, Wong MY, Hou LT. (2006) Comparison of acellular dermal graft and palatal autograft in the reconstruction of keratinized gingiva around dental implants: a case report. International Journal of Periodontics & Restorative Dentistry. 26(3).
  20. Kazor CE, Al-Shammari K, Sarment DP, Misch CE, Wang HL. (2004) Implant plastic surgery: a review and rationale. Oral Implantol. 30(4):240-54.
  21. Thoma DS, Benic GI, Zwahlen M, Hammerle CH, Jung RE. (2009) A systematic review assessing soft tissue augmentation techniques. Clin Oral Implants Res. 20:146-65.
  22. Elkhaweldi A, Rincon Soler C, Cayarga R, Suzuki T, Kaufman Z. (2015) Various techniques to increase keratinized tissue for implant supported overdentures: retrospective case series. International journal of dentistry. Pp. 2015.
  23. Büyükerkmen E, Oncu E. (2014) Gingival graft prior to and after delivery of implant-supported prostheses. Clin Oral Implants Res. 25.Pp. 25.
  24. Wei PC, Laurell L, Geivelis M, Lingen MW, Maddalozzo D. (2000) Acellular dermal matrix allografts to achieve increased attached gingiva. Part 1. A clinical study. J Periodontol. 71(8):1297-1305.

 

 

 

 

 

 

whatsapp