Biological aspects: Summary and consensus statements of group 2. The 5th EAO Consensus Conference 2018

OBJECTIVES This publication reports the EAO Workshop group-2 discussions and consensus statements which provided the scientific evidence on the influence of biological parameters on implant-related clinical outcomes. MATERIAL AND METHODS The first publication was a systematic review on the biological effects of abutment material on the stability of peri-implant marginal bone levels and the second, a critical narrative review on how peri-implant diagnostic parameters correspond with long-term implant survival and success. The group evaluated the content of both publications, made corrections and recommendations to the authors and agreed on the consensus statements, clinical recommendations and recommendations for future research, which are described in this consensus report. RESULTS Tested abutment materials can be considered appropriate for clinical use according to the observation period studied (mean 3.5 years). Mean peri-implant bone loss and mean probing pocket depths are not adequate outcomes to study the prevalence of peri-implantitis, while the reporting of frequency distributions is considered more appropriate. CONCLUSIONS Titanium is currently considered the standard of care as abutment material, although other materials may be more suitable for aesthetic locations. Peri-implantitis should be diagnosed through composite evaluations of peri-implant tissue inflammation and assessment of marginal bone loss with different thresholds.

[1]  H. De Bruyn,et al.  How do peri‐implant biologic parameters correspond with implant survival and peri‐implantitis? A critical review , 2018, Clinical oral implants research.

[2]  M. Sanz,et al.  Biological effect of the abutment material on the stability of peri‐implant marginal bone levels: A systematic review and meta‐analysis , 2018, Clinical oral implants research.

[3]  G. Huynh-Ba,et al.  Consensus report: Peri-implant diseases and conditions , 2018 .

[4]  M. P. Salido,et al.  A Clinical Study Assessing the Influence of Anodized Titanium and Zirconium Dioxide Abutments and Peri-implant Soft Tissue Thickness on the Optical Outcome of Implant-Supported Lithium Disilicate Single Crowns. , 2017, The International journal of oral & maxillofacial implants.

[5]  A. Bascones-Martínez,et al.  Impact of abutment material on peri-implant soft tissue color. An in vitro study , 2017, Clinical Oral Investigations.

[6]  T. Linkevicius,et al.  The effect of zirconia or titanium as abutment material on soft peri-implant tissues: a systematic review and meta-analysis. , 2015, Clinical oral implants research.

[7]  D. Dudea,et al.  Peri-implant soft tissue colour around titanium and zirconia abutments: a prospective randomized controlled clinical study. , 2015, Clinical oral implants research.

[8]  E. Romeo,et al.  Influence of abutment material on the gingival color of implant-supported all-ceramic restorations: a prospective multicenter study. , 2011, Clinical oral implants research.

[9]  R. Jung,et al.  The effect of all-ceramic and porcelain-fused-to-metal restorations on marginal peri-implant soft tissue color: a randomized controlled clinical trial. , 2008, The International journal of periodontics & restorative dentistry.