Title of article :
Management of Retrograde Peri-Implantitis Using an Air-Abrasive Device, Er,Cr:YSGG Laser, and Guided Bone Regeneration
Author/Authors :
Soldatos, Nikolaos Department of Periodontics and Dental Hygiene - School of Dentistry - University of Texas Health Science Center at Houston, Houston, TX, USA , Romanos, Georgios E. Department of Periodontology - School of Dental Medicine - Stony Brook University, Stony Brook, NY, USA , Michaiel, Michelle Department of Periodontics and Dental Hygiene - School of Dentistry - University of Texas Health Science Center at Houston, Houston, TX, USA , Sajadi, Ali Department of Periodontics and Dental Hygiene - School of Dentistry - University of Texas Health Science Center at Houston, Houston, TX, USA , Angelov, Nikola Department of Periodontics and Dental Hygiene - School of Dentistry - University of Texas Health Science Center at Houston, Houston, TX, USA , Weltman, Robin Department of Periodontics and Dental Hygiene - School of Dentistry - University of Texas Health Science Center at Houston, Houston, TX, USA
Abstract :
Background. The placement of an implant in a previously infected site is an important etiologic factor contributing to implant
failure. The aim of this case report is to present the management of retrograde peri-implantitis (RPI) in a first maxillary molar site,
2 years after the implant placement. The RPI was treated using an air-abrasive device, Er,Cr:YSGG laser, and guided bone
regeneration (GBR). Case Description. A 65-year-old Caucasian male presented with a draining fistula associated with an implant
at tooth #3. Tooth #3 revealed periapical radiolucency two years before the implant placement. Tooth #3 was extracted, and a ridge
preservation procedure was performed followed by implant rehabilitation. A periapical radiograph (PA) showed lack of bone
density around the implant apex. +e site was decontaminated with an air-abrasive device and Er,Cr:YSGG laser, and GBR was
performed. The patient was seen every two weeks until suture removal, followed by monthly visits for 12 months. The periapical
X-rays, from 6 to 13 months postoperatively, showed increased bone density around the implant apex, with no signs of residual
clinical or radiographic pathology and probing depths ≤4 mm. Conclusions. +e etiology of RPI in this case was the placement of
an implant in a previously infected site. The use of an air-abrasive device, Er,Cr:YSGG, and GBR was utilized to treat this case of
RPI. The site was monitored for 13 months, and increased radiographic bone density was noted.
