Two to six‐year disease resolution and marginal bone stability rates of a modified resective‐implantoplasty therapy in 32 peri‐implantitis cases
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Different nonsurgical, antibacterial, surgical, and regenerative approaches to treat peri-implantitis have been proposed, but there is no an actual "gold" standard treatment showing the most favorable results to counteract peri-implantitis effects. PURPOSE: To evaluate radiographically and clinically the disease resolution and peri-implant marginal bone stability rates of peri-implantitis cases treated through a combined resective-implantoplasty therapy in a moderate to long-term period. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Records of patients diagnosed with peri-implantitis and treated through the same protocol applying a combined resective-implantoplasty therapy with minimum 2-year follow-up were screened. Eligible patients were contacted and asked to undergo clinical and radiologic examination. Progressive marginal bone loss, bleeding on probing, suppuration, implant mobility, and implant fracture were considered to establish the disease resolution rate and peri-implant bone stability of the treated implants. RESULTS: Twenty-three patients with 32 treated implants fulfilled the inclusion criteria. Over the 2 to 6-year follow-up, (mean time: 3.4 ± 1.5 years), the disease resolution rate was 83% (patient level) and 87% (implant level). Four implants (13%) were lost or removed due to continuous MBL and osseointegration failure. At follow-up, peri-implant marginal bone remained stable with no further bone loss in 87% of the treated implants. BOP was absent in 89.3% (implant level), suppuration was resolved in all cases, and no pain or implant fracture was reported. CONCLUSION: Implantoplasty treated cases showed high disease resolution rate and peri-implant marginal bone stability. This surgical antibiofilm strategy can counteract peri-implantitis progression providing an adequate environment for implant function and longevity over a moderate to long-term period.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".