ArticleMedicina oral, patologia oral y cirugia bucal2026
Impact of interventional periodontal therapy on the longevity of failing dental implants: A retrospective analysis.
Article in Medicina oral, patologia oral y cirugia bucal, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundBiological complications such as peri-implantitis present a significant challenge to the long-term stability of dental implants, often leading to failure if left untreated. While a history of periodontitis is a known risk factor, there is a lack of real-world data quantifying the "survival extension" provided by therapeutic interventions. This study aimed to evaluate the efficacy of surgical and non-surgical "rescue" therapies in extending the lifespan of dental implants that ultimately failed. MATERIAL AND
methodsA retrospective cohort analysis was conducted using the multi-institutional BigMouth dental data repository, examining patients treated between 2011 and 2022. The study identified 725 failed implants, which were stratified into two clusters: A "Rescue Therapy" group (n=130) that received active intervention (e.g., scaling, flap surgery, bone grafting) and a "No Rescue" control group (n=595) that received no intervention prior to failure. The primary outcome was time-to-failure, calculated in months. A subgroup analysis of implants surviving beyond 12 months was performed to isolate late-stage biological failures.
resultsThe Rescue Therapy group demonstrated a statistically significant survival advantage over the No Rescue group. In the subgroup of implants surviving the initial osseointegration phase (>12 months), those receiving rescue therapy achieved a median survival of 91.1 months, compared to 40.9 months for untreated implants (p<0.001). This differential equates to a median "survival extension" of 50.2 months (approximately 4.2 years) attributable to active intervention. Non-smokers showed a trend toward higher utilization of rescue therapies.
conclusionsInterventional periodontal therapy significantly extends the functional lifespan of failing dental implants compared to non-intervention. For late-stage failures, rescue therapy provides a clinically meaningful survival extension of over four years. These findings advocate for an aggressive interventional approach to manage peri-implant biological complications, delaying explantation and maintaining function.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.