Logo
Arch Neurosci

Image Credit:Arch Neurosci

Comparison of Microorganism’s Bone Level and Tissue Level Implant Placement After Six Months in Stroke Patients

Author(s):
Fahimeh FeiliFahimeh Feili1, Mohamadali RoozegarMohamadali Roozegar1,*
1Oral and Dental Health Research Center, Ilam University of Medical Sciences, Ilam, Iran


Archives of Neuroscience:Vol. 12, issue 2; e157926
Published online:Feb 26, 2025
Article type:Research Article
Received:Nov 12, 2024
Accepted:Jan 12, 2025
How to Cite:Fahimeh FeiliMohamadali RoozegarComparison of Microorganism’s Bone Level and Tissue Level Implant Placement After Six Months in Stroke Patients.Arch Neurosci.12(2):e157926.https://doi.org/10.5812/ans-157926.

Abstract

Background:

Stroke is one of the leading causes of disability and the second leading cause of death worldwide.

Objectives:

This study aimed to compare the levels of microorganisms around bone level and tissue level implants after six months in patients who have suffered a stroke.

Methods:

The study included 30 patients who visited dental clinics for implant placement. These patients were divided into two groups: Fifteen patients received bone level implants, and 15 received tissue level implants. The number of microorganisms around each type of implant was examined over a six-month period. Data were analyzed using SPSS software.

Results:

The study included 30 patients, divided equally into two groups: Bone level implants (15 patients) and tissue level implants (15 patients). The infection detection rate was 20% in the bone level implants group and 33.3% in the tissue level implants group, with an overall infection rate of 26.7%.

Conclusions:

The accumulation of microorganisms was higher in tissue level implants compared to bone level implants. Therefore, it is crucial to implement measures to prevent and manage infections in tissue level implants.

1. Background

Throughout life, individuals may lose teeth due to various causes, including caries, trauma, falls, periodontal diseases, and conflicts. Dental implants are a successful treatment method for replacing missing teeth. Compared to other therapeutic prostheses, dental implants have a higher survival and success rate. An ideal implant resembles a natural tooth in appearance and possesses beauty, strength, and durability. The success of implant placement is crucial (1-5). Patients of all ages are exposed to pathogenic microorganisms; however, in middle and old age, the risk of pathogenic microorganisms affecting individuals increases due to chronic diseases. A critical prerequisite for implant success is its initial stability, which is determined by the resistance or friction between the implant and the bone during placement (6).

Dental implants can experience various complications, categorized as biomechanical and biological. Patients seeking implant installation face issues such as the presence of microorganisms, mucositis around the implant, and peri-implantitis. Peri-implant mucositis is the inflammation of soft tissue around dental implants, while peri-implantitis involves an inflammatory reaction with the loss of bone supporting the implant (7-10). These complications result from bacterial accumulation around the implant and can lead to implant loss. Gram-negative bacteria, often responsible for gum disease, play a significant role in implant loss (11).

The common age range for implant placement is middle to old age, where patients often face mouth and dental issues alongside dysfunction of other body organs due to chronic and non-chronic diseases (12-15). Stroke is a prevalent condition leading to hospital visits in middle and old age (16, 17). There is a relationship between dental diseases and stroke; studies indicate that dental diseases such as tooth decay, periodontitis, and tooth loss can influence stroke occurrence (18-20). Stroke is a leading cause of disability and the second leading cause of death worldwide. In a study by Farzadfard et al., 65% of stroke patients died or remained disabled during a 5-year follow-up (21, 22). Disability from stroke affects patients' quality of life and lifestyle, causing complications such as hemiplegia, social communication issues, physical activity limitations, speech disorders, economic pressure, prolonged hospital stays, and inability to perform daily activities (23-26).

Given the prevalence of complications in stroke patients, attention to their oral and dental health is crucial. The presence of pathogenic microorganisms in these patients endangers their health and jeopardizes implant success. Successful implant treatment depends on the absence of inflammation in tissues surrounding the implant, as bacterial colonization, streptococci, anaerobic bacteria, and other pathogenic microorganisms can disrupt implant function (27-30).

2. Objectives

This study aimed to determine the number of microorganisms around bone level and tissue level implants after six months of loading in stroke patients in Ilam city.

3. Methods

This study was conducted on a group of patients who visited dental clinics and offices for implant placement. A total of 30 patients were examined regarding the number of microorganisms around bone-level (15 patients) and tissue-level (15 patients) implants.

The inclusion criteria for the study included patients who had suffered a stroke within the last 6 months to 2 years, as confirmed by their clinical records in the hospital. Additional criteria included obtaining informed written consent for participation, referral for implant placement, a doctor's confirmation of the necessity for implant placement, expert approval by a neurologist following neurological screening, the absence of critical health issues, and residency in Ilam city.

Exclusion criteria included the occurrence of any life-threatening condition or disease (such as death, accidents, or hospitalization), any traumatic injury to the mouth and teeth, and the patient's unwillingness to continue participation in the study.

The study was conducted by examining patients who visited clinics and offices in Ilam city for implant placement. If the patients met the inclusion criteria, they underwent implant placement, and a total of 30 patients were included in the study. Stroke patients were monitored for 6 months after implant placement to assess the number of microorganisms around bone-level and tissue-level implants. The collected data were analyzed using SPSS version 16 software with descriptive and analytical statistical tests.

All investigations related to the prevalence of microorganisms were conducted under standardized laboratory conditions, including the use of identical laboratory kits and devices. Additionally, all guidelines and ethical standards set by the University Research Ethics Committee were strictly followed, as outlined in the Code of Ethics in Research under the reference number IR.MEDILAM.REC.1402.045.

4. Results

The study included 30 patients, divided into two groups: Fifteen patients received bone level implants, and 15 received tissue level implants. The demographic characteristics of the patients are presented in Tables 1 and 2. Of the participants, 15 were male and 15 were female. Additionally, 43.3% of the patients were former smokers, and only 6.7% were current smokers.

For the bone level implant group, the majority of patients were aged 51 - 60 years (60%). In terms of compliance with oral hygiene, 66.7% had an average status. Educationally, 53.3% had less than a diploma. Regarding health status, 86.7% did not have diabetes, 60% were not former smokers, and 93.3% were not current smokers (Table 1).

Table 1.Investigation of the Number of Microorganisms Around Bone Level Implants a
VariablesValuesBone Level ImplantsP-Value
YesNo
Age0.99
40 - 503 (20)1 (6.66)2 (13.33)
51 - 609 (60)1 (6.66)8 (53.33)
> 603 (20)1 (6.66)2 (13.33)
Compliance with oral hygiene0.83
Weak3 (20)03 (20)
Average10 (66.7)3 (20)7 (46.66)
Great2 (13.3)02 (13.33)
Gender0.63
Male8 (53.3)2 (13.33)6 (40)
Female7 (46.7)1 (6.66)6 (40)
Education0.99
Illiterate6 (40)1 (6.66)5 (3.33)
Less than a diploma8 (53.3)2 (13.33)6 (40)
Diploma and above1 (6.7)01 (6.66)
Diabetes mellitus type 20.001
Yes2 (13.3)2 (13.33)0
No13 (86.7)1 (6.66)12 (80)
Former smoker0.32
Yes6 (40)2 (13.33)4 (26.66)
No9 (60)1 (6.66)8 (53.33)
Current smoker0.04
Yes1 (6.7)1 (6.66)0
No14 (93.3)2 (13.33)12 (80)

Investigation of the Number of Microorganisms Around Bone Level Implants a

Table 2.Examination of the Number of Microorganisms Around the Tissue Level Implants a
VariablesValuesTissue Level ImplantsP-Value
YesNo
Age0.99
40 - 504 (26.7)1 (6.66)3 (20)
51 - 607 (46.7)3 (20)4 (26.66)
> 604 (26.7)1 (6.66)3 (20)
Compliance with oral hygiene0.7
Weak11 (73.3)4 (26.66)7 (46.66)
Average4 (26.7)1 (6.66)3 (20)
Great0 (0)00
Gender0.001
Male7 (46.7)5 (3.33)2 (13.33)
Female8 (53.3)08 (53.33)
Education0.04
Illiterate5 (33.3)05 (3.33)
Less than a diploma7 (46.7)34 (26.66)
Diploma and above3 (20)2 (13.33)1 (6.66)
Diabetes mellitus type 20.99
Yes3 (20)1 (6.66)2 (13.33)
No12 (80)4 (26.66)8 (53.33)
Former smoker0.001
Yes7 (46.7)5 (3.33)2 (13.33)
No8 (53.3)08 (53.33)
Current smoker0.16
Yes1 (6.7)1 (6.66)0
No14 (93.3)4 (26.66)10 (66.66)

Examination of the Number of Microorganisms Around the Tissue Level Implants a

The detection rate of infection in the bone level implants group was 20%, while in the tissue level implants group, it was 33.3%. The overall infection rate across both groups was 26.7%. Additionally, no significant difference was observed between the number of microorganisms and the methods used in implant placement (P = 0.42) (Table 3).

Table 3.Comparison of the Frequency of Microorganisms According to the Type of Implant a
VariablesYesNoP-Value
Bone level implants3 (20)12 (80)0.42
Tissue level implants5 (33.3)10 (66.7)
Total8 (26.7)22 (73.3)

Comparison of the Frequency of Microorganisms According to the Type of Implant a

5. Discussion

In this study, the overall prevalence of infection after implant placement was 26.7%. In contrast, a study by Camps-Font et al. in Spain, using a retrospective cohort method, reported a prevalence of 2.8%, with 65% of implants removed due to infection (31). Tabrizi et al. in Iran, using a cross-sectional cohort method, found that 3.46% of 980 patients with implant placement were diagnosed with infection, and 70.6% of these cases resulted in failure (32). Similarly, Sagnori et al. in Brazil, in a retrospective study conducted 21 years ago, reported that out of 4886 patients, 164 were diagnosed with infection (33).

In this study, the prevalence of infection after implant placement was higher in men than in women. Figueiredo et al. in Spain, examining 88 patients in case and control groups, also found a higher prevalence of infection in men (34). Thiebot et al. identified risk factors such as bone type density and smoking (35), while Kumari et al. reported that pain, mobility, and suppuration were more prevalent in men (36), consistent with our findings. Conversely, another study found no relationship between diabetes, age, gender, high blood pressure, and long-term drug use with implant failure (35). Differences in demographic characteristics may contribute to these variations.

Periodontitis increases systemic inflammatory response, playing a role in stroke development (37). Effective patient management is crucial in implant placement, especially for those with systemic and neurological conditions, including stroke. Findler et al. found no evidence of infective endocarditis (IE) during follow-up in patients with implant placement, although one patient developed mitral valve thrombosis and another experienced a stroke six months post-implantation (38). Elter et al. reported stroke/TIA incidences of 15.6% in dentate non-examinees, 13.5% in periodontal examinees, and 22.5% in edentulous individuals (37). Although hemorrhagic stroke is not infectious, other studies link stroke and periodontitis. Increased inflammation in stroke patients can cause acute cerebral ischemic episodes, highlighting the need for preventive measures to mitigate inflammatory responses and disease exacerbation (20, 39-41).

A strength of this study is its focus on implant placement in stroke patients, a topic with limited research in neurological contexts. These findings provide valuable insights for researchers. However, a limitation is the small sample size, suggesting that future studies should include larger patient cohorts.

5.1. Conclusions

The accumulation of microorganisms was higher in tissue level implants compared to bone level implants, underscoring the need for preventive and management measures. It is essential for dentists to provide patients with the necessary training and care to prevent infection.

Acknowledgments

Footnotes

References

  • 1.
    Kochar SP, Reche A, Paul P. The Etiology and Management of Dental Implant Failure: A Review. Cureus. 2022;14(10). e30455. [PubMed ID: 36415394]. [PubMed Central ID: PMC9674049]. https://doi.org/10.7759/cureus.30455.
  • 2.
    Misch CE. Contemporary Implant Dentistry-E-Book: Contemporary Implant Dentistry-E-Book. Amsterdam, Netherlands: Elsevier Health Sciences; 2007.
  • 3.
    Norgaard Petersen F, Jensen SS, Dahl M. Implant treatment after traumatic tooth loss: A systematic review. Dent Traumatol. 2022;38(2):105-16. [PubMed ID: 34997947]. https://doi.org/10.1111/edt.12730.
  • 4.
    Gonçalves MC, Pamplona AB, Nara EOB, Dias ICP. Optimizing Dental Implant Distribution: A Strategic Approach for Supply Chain Management in the Beauty and Well-Being Industry. In: Janssen M, Pinheiro L, Matheus R, Frankenberger F, DwivediYogesh K, Pappas IO, et al., editors. New Sustainable Horizons in Artificial Intelligence and Digital Solutions. New York, USA: Springer; 2023. p. 385-97. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-50040-4_28.
  • 5.
    Al-Qazzaz R, Saeed DH. Dental caries and stress in Kurdish adolescents. Academic J. 2024;39(4):104-11.
  • 6.
    Fakhr HY, Shayesteh YS, Khorsand A, Panjnoush M, Fard MJK, Heidari M. [Evaluation of the differences between implant stability and crestal bone resorption between osteotomy and conventional techniques]. J Dent Med. 2022;35. FA.
  • 7.
    Renvert S, Persson G, Pirih FQ, Camargo PM. Peri‐implant health, peri‐implant mucositis, and peri‐implantitis: Case definitions and diagnostic considerations. J Clin Periodontol. 2018;45(S20). https://doi.org/10.1111/jcpe.12956.
  • 8.
    Kiran B, Toman M, Buduneli N, Lappin DF, Toksavul S, Nizam N. Intraoral versus extraoral cementation of implant-supported single crowns: Clinical, biomarker, and microbiological comparisons. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res. 2018;20(2):170-9. [PubMed ID: 29210181]. https://doi.org/10.1111/cid.12567.
  • 9.
    Kandasamy B, Kaur N, Tomar GK, Bharadwaj A, Manual L, Chauhan M. Long-term Retrospective Study based on Implant Success Rate in Patients with Risk Factor: 15-year Follow-up. J Contemp Dent Pract. 2018;19(1):90-3. [PubMed ID: 29358541]. https://doi.org/10.5005/jp-journals-10024-2217.
  • 10.
    Nasiri S, Rafiei F, Darabian S. [Determining the prevalence of peri-implantitis in patients one year after prosthetic loading in Khorramabad in 2021]. J Dent Med. 2021;34:21. FA.
  • 11.
    Eblaghian G, Reyhani Mohamadi A, Kalantari Nezhad M. [Comparative study of two different implants with hexogonal connection on the amount of bacteria accumulated at the implant platform site: An in-vivo study]. J Dent Med. 2021;34(1):33-40. FA.
  • 12.
    Saraç Atagün Ö, Kalyoncuoğlu ÜT. Evaluation of Elderly Patients’ Knowledge and Awareness of Dental Implant Treatments Applying to Periodontology and Prosthodontics Departments. Euro J Geriatrics Gerontol. 2023;5(2):132-8. https://doi.org/10.4274/ejgg.galenos.2023.2022-12-5.
  • 13.
    Kazeminezhad B, Tarjoman A, Borji M. Relationship Between Praying and Self-Care in Elderly with Heart Failure: A Cross-Sectional Study in West of Iran. J Relig Health. 2020;59(1):19-28. [PubMed ID: 30644042]. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10943-018-00757-8.
  • 14.
    Borji M, Mousavimoghadam SR, Salimi E, Otaghi M, Azizi Y. The Impact of Spiritual Care Education on Anxiety in Family Caregivers of Patients with Heart Failure. J Relig Health. 2019;58(6):1961-9. [PubMed ID: 30406492]. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10943-018-0689-9.
  • 15.
    Mohammadi HR, Asadoola Y, Erfani A, Ghoreishi Amin N, Karimiyarandi H, Sadeghi S, et al. Effectiveness of Pulse Intravenous Infusion of Methylprednisolone on Pain in Patients with Lumbar Disc Herniation: A Randomized Controlled Trial. Anesthesiol Pain Med. 2024;14(4). https://doi.org/10.5812/aapm-149442.
  • 16.
    Spiegler KM, Irvine H, Torres J, Cardiel M, Ishida K, Lewis A, et al. Characteristics associated with 30-day post-stroke readmission within an academic urban hospital network. J Stroke Cerebrovasc Dis. 2024;33(11):107984. [PubMed ID: 39216710]. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jstrokecerebrovasdis.2024.107984.
  • 17.
    Sun J, Yang Y, Wang L. Exercise participation and associated factors in patients with stroke at the stage of sequelae period. Academic J Health Sci. 2022;37(5):56-63.
  • 18.
    Zhang H, Yu Q, Ying C, Liu Y, Wang X, Guo Y, et al. Association between dental diseases and stroke. Saudi Dent J. 2024;36(11):1389-96. [PubMed ID: 39619717]. [PubMed Central ID: PMC11605714]. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sdentj.2024.09.012.
  • 19.
    Sanz M, Marco Del Castillo A, Jepsen S, Gonzalez-Juanatey JR, D'Aiuto F, Bouchard P, et al. Periodontitis and cardiovascular diseases: Consensus report. J Clin Periodontol. 2020;47(3):268-88. [PubMed ID: 32011025]. [PubMed Central ID: PMC7027895]. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcpe.13189.
  • 20.
    Lafon A, Pereira B, Dufour T, Rigouby V, Giroud M, Bejot Y, et al. Periodontal disease and stroke: a meta-analysis of cohort studies. Eur J Neurol. 2014;21(9):1155-61. e66-7. [PubMed ID: 24712659]. https://doi.org/10.1111/ene.12415.
  • 21.
    Erfani A, Aghamiri SH, Karimi R. Investigating the Role of Hyper Density Signal Length in the Middle Cerebral Artery on the Degree of Disability of Arterial Ischemic Stroke Patients. Arch Neurosci. 2024;11(4). https://doi.org/10.5812/ans-150888.
  • 22.
    Farzadfard MT, Sheikh Andalibi MS, Thrift AG, Morovatdar N, Stranges S, Amiri A, et al. Long-term disability after stroke in Iran: Evidence from the Mashhad Stroke Incidence Study. Int J Stroke. 2019;14(1):44-7. [PubMed ID: 30117788]. https://doi.org/10.1177/1747493018789839.
  • 23.
    Mohammadia HR, Erfania A, Jamshidbeigib Y, Rahmatianc A, Otaghid M. Effect of using rituximab on disability in patients with multiple sclerosis. Risk. 2024;5(7).
  • 24.
    Pouy S, Otaghi M, Borji M, Tarjoman A, Sanei P. Lifestyle of the Elderly with Stroke: A Cross Sectional Study. Arch Neurosci. 2018;In Press(In Press). https://doi.org/10.5812/ans.68049.
  • 25.
    Adan AM. A study of evaluation and proper diagnosis of stroke in CT scan and MRI. Academic J. 2022;37(6).
  • 26.
    Lieuw D, Bipat R, Schraeyen K. First-ever stroke patients in Suriname show more communication disorders than swallowing disorders and these depend on age and length of stay in hospital. Medicina Balear. 2023;38(1):23-8.
  • 27.
    Shahabouee M, Rismanchian M, Yaghini J, Babashahi A, Badrian H, Goroohi H. Microflora around teeth and dental implants. Dent Res J (Isfahan). 2012;9(2):215-20. [PubMed ID: 22623941]. [PubMed Central ID: PMC3353701]. https://doi.org/10.4103/1735-3327.95239.
  • 28.
    Piattelli A, Scarano A, Piattelli M. Histologic observations on 230 retrieved dental implants: 8 years' experience (1989-1996). J Periodontol. 1998;69(2):178-84. [PubMed ID: 9526917]. https://doi.org/10.1902/jop.1998.69.2.178.
  • 29.
    Quirynen M, De Soete M, van Steenberghe D. Infectious risks for oral implants: a review of the literature. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2002;13(1):1-19. [PubMed ID: 12005139]. https://doi.org/10.1034/j.1600-0501.2002.130101.x.
  • 30.
    Scarano A, Piattelli M, Caputi S, Favero GA, Piattelli A. Bacterial adhesion on commercially pure titanium and zirconium oxide disks: an in vivo human study. J Periodontol. 2004;75(2):292-6. [PubMed ID: 15068118]. https://doi.org/10.1902/jop.2004.75.2.292.
  • 31.
    Camps-Font O, Martin-Fatas P, Cle-Ovejero A, Figueiredo R, Gay-Escoda C, Valmaseda-Castellon E. Postoperative infections after dental implant placement: Variables associated with increased risk of failure. J Periodontol. 2018;89(10):1165-73. [PubMed ID: 29797721]. https://doi.org/10.1002/JPER.18-0024.
  • 32.
    Tabrizi R, Zarchini R, Ozkan BT, Majdi S. Dental Implant Survival after Postoperative Infection. J Maxillofac Oral Surg. 2022;21(3):796-801. [PubMed ID: 36274880]. [PubMed Central ID: PMC9474760]. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12663-020-01460-6.
  • 33.
    Sagnori RS, da Fonseca VJ, Lima LHF, Goulart DR, Asprino L, de Moraes M, et al. Early dental implant failure associated with postoperative infection: A retrospective 21‐year study. Oral Surgery. 2024;17(3):214-20. https://doi.org/10.1111/ors.12875.
  • 34.
    Figueiredo R, Camps-Font O, Valmaseda-Castellon E, Gay-Escoda C. Risk Factors for Postoperative Infections After Dental Implant Placement: A Case-Control Study. J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2015;73(12):2312-8. [PubMed ID: 26311462]. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joms.2015.07.025.
  • 35.
    Thiebot N, Hamdani A, Blanchet F, Dame M, Tawfik S, Mbapou E, et al. Implant failure rate and the prevalence of associated risk factors: a 6-year retrospective observational survey. J Oral Med Oral Surg. 2022;28(2). https://doi.org/10.1051/mbcb/2021045.
  • 36.
    Kumari S, Deka DM, Sharma L. Assessment of incidence of postoperative infections after dental implant placement. J Adv Med Dent Sci Res. 2022;10(6):19-22.
  • 37.
    Elter JR, Offenbacher S, Toole JF, Beck JD. Relationship of periodontal disease and edentulism to stroke/TIA. J Dent Res. 2003;82(12):998-1001. [PubMed ID: 14630902]. https://doi.org/10.1177/154405910308201212.
  • 38.
    Findler M, Chackartchi T, Regev E. Dental implants in patients at high risk for infective endocarditis: a preliminary study. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2014;43(10):1282-5. [PubMed ID: 24893765]. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijom.2014.04.015.
  • 39.
    Leira Y, Seoane J, Blanco M, Rodriguez-Yanez M, Takkouche B, Blanco J, et al. Association between periodontitis and ischemic stroke: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Eur J Epidemiol. 2017;32(1):43-53. [PubMed ID: 27300352]. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10654-016-0170-6.
  • 40.
    Sfyroeras GS, Roussas N, Saleptsis VG, Argyriou C, Giannoukas AD. Association between periodontal disease and stroke. J Vasc Surg. 2012;55(4):1178-84. [PubMed ID: 22244863]. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvs.2011.10.008.
  • 41.
    Scannapieco FA, Bush RB, Paju S. Associations between periodontal disease and risk for atherosclerosis, cardiovascular disease, and stroke. A systematic review. Ann Periodontol. 2003;8(1):38-53. [PubMed ID: 14971247]. https://doi.org/10.1902/annals.2003.8.1.38.
comments

Leave a comment here


Crossmark
Crossmark
Checking
Share on
Cited by
Metrics

Purchasing Reprints

  • Copyright Clearance Center (CCC) handles bulk orders for article reprints for Brieflands. To place an order for reprints, please click here (   https://www.copyright.com/landing/reprintsinquiryform/ ). Clicking this link will bring you to a CCC request form where you can provide the details of your order. Once complete, please click the ‘Submit Request’ button and CCC’s Reprints Services team will generate a quote for your review.
Search Relations

Author(s):

Related Articles