Xerostomia, reduced salivary flow, and oral burning: Associations from a cross-sectional study.

OBJECTIVE: Determine the association between xerostomia, salivary flow, and oral burning. STUDY DESIGN: A cross-sectional retrospective study involving consecutive patients with an oral burning complaint during a 6-year period. Treatments including a dry mouth management protocol (DMP) along with other therapies were implemented. Study variables included xerostomia, unstimulated whole salivary flow rate (UWSFR), pain intensity, and medication use. Statistical analyses included Pearson correlations, linear regression, and Analysis of Variance. RESULTS: Among the 124 patients meeting the inclusion criteria, 99 were female, with a mean age of 63.1 (range 26-86) years. The baseline UWSFR was low (0.24 ± 0.29 mL/min) and 46% experienced hyposalivation (<0.1 mL/min). Xerostomia was reported by 77.7%, and 82.8% had coexistence of xerostomia and hyposalivation. DMP resulted in significant pain reduction between visits (P < .001). CONCLUSIONS: Hyposalivation and xerostomia were highly prevalent in patients with oral burning. A DMP proved beneficial to these patients.

Can Osseointegration Be Achieved Without Primary Stability?

The osseointegration and survival of dental implants are linked to primary stability. Good primary stability relies on the mechanical friction between implant surface and surrounding bone with absence of mobility in the osteotomy site immediately after implant placement. Several factors have been found to affect implant primary stability, including bone density, implant design, and surgical technique. Various methods have been used to assess implant primary stability including insertion torque and resonance frequency analysis. This article aims to evaluate the success of osseointegration in the absence of primary stability and to propose recommendations to manage implants that lack primary stability.

Does Peri-Implant Mucosa Have a Prognostic Value?

The need for keratinized tissue around implants remains a controversial topic. However, reconstruction of keratinized mucosa may be needed to facilitate restorative procedures, improve aesthetics, and control plaque during oral hygiene. Free gingival grafts, connective tissue grafts, allogenic/xenograft materials, and apically positioned flaps have been used to augment soft tissue around implants. Four different timing protocols have been explored with regard to soft-tissue augmentation: before and during implant placement, during the second-stage surgery, or after restoration. The timing and technique of soft-tissue augmentation remain controversial and lack support from literature. Long-term clinical studies to establish clear guidelines are warranted.