Longevity of teeth in patients susceptible to periodontitis: Clinical outcomes and risk factors associated with tooth loss after active therapy and 30 years of supportive periodontal care.

AIM: (i) To evaluate the efficacy of active periodontal therapy supplemented by supportive periodontal care (SPC) in retaining dentition during a 30-year follow-up period in patients susceptible to periodontitis, and (ii) to assess the prognostic factors associated with tooth loss. MATERIALS AND METHODS: One-hundred and fifty-four patients with periodontitis, retrospectively classified as stage I-IV and grade B-C periodontitis, treated between 1984 and 1986 in a private practice, were enrolled in this study. After periodontal assessment, patients received non-surgical treatment followed by surgical periodontal therapy, orthodontic treatment, and tooth-splinting, where appropriate. SPC consisted of a strict recall programme every 3-6 months over a 30-year period. Recurrences were treated either with subgingival root planing or flap surgery. Dental and periodontal variables were measured at baseline (T0), end of active therapy (T1), and after 25 (T2) and 30 (T3) years. Generalized mixed models were analysed to assess the prognostic factors associated with and survival analyses for tooth loss. RESULTS: Data on 154 patients (4083 teeth) were available at baseline (T0). Teeth considered unworthy of treatment were extracted during active therapy (160, 3.9%) and at re-assessment (13, 0.3%; T1). After 25 years of SPC, 140 teeth out of 3910 in 154 patients (3.6%) were lost (24 in 18 patients for periodontal reasons). Between 25 and 30 years, 20 patients (482 teeth) dropped out, and 61 teeth (2%) were lost (15 in 14 patients for periodontal reasons). Overall, 201 teeth (5.1%) were lost (39 for periodontal reasons) in 30 years of SPC. Generalized mixed models showed that stage III or stage IV periodontitis was associated with greater tooth loss during SPC compared to stage I or stage II (OR = 2.10; p = .048). Generalized periodontitis showed a statistically significant OR = 3.24 (p = .016) compared to the localized one. In SPC (T1-T3), age (p = .011), gender (male; p = .038), molar teeth (p = < .001), T0 and T1 pocket depth (p = < .001), tooth mobility grades 2 (p = .018) and 3 (p = .050), T0 and T1 bone loss (p = < .001), and presence of a root canal treatment (p = < .001) and a crown (p = .009) were statistically significantly associated with tooth loss. CONCLUSION: (i) Periodontal therapy and a stringent SPC are effective in maintaining most of the teeth in patients with moderate/advanced periodontitis for 30 years, and (ii) age, gender, molar teeth, pocket depth, bone loss, and the presence of a root canal treatment and a crown are prognostic factors associated with tooth loss.

Comparative evidence of different surgical techniques for the management of vertical alveolar ridge defects in terms of complications and efficacy: A systematic review and network meta-analysis.

AIM: To systematically appraise the available evidence on vertical ridge augmentation (VRA) techniques and estimate a treatment-based ranking on the incidence of complications as well as their clinical effectiveness. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Searches were conducted in six databases to identify randomized clinical trials comparing VRA techniques up to November 2022. The incidence of complications (primary) and of early, major, surgical and intra-operative complications, vertical bone gain (VBG), marginal bone loss, need for additional grafting, implant success/survival, and patient-reported outcome measures (secondary) were chosen as outcomes. Direct and indirect effects and treatment ranking were estimated using Bayesian pair-wise and network meta-analysis (NMA) models. RESULTS: Thirty-two trials (761 participants and 943 defects) were included. Five NMA models involving nine treatment groups were created: onlay, inlay, dense-polytetrafluoroethylene, expanded-polytetrafluoroethylene, titanium, resorbable membranes, distraction osteogenesis, tissue expansion and short implants. Compared with short implants, statistically significant higher odds ratios of healing complications were confirmed for all groups except those with resorbable membranes (odds ratio 5.4, 95% credible interval 0.92-29.14). The latter group, however, ranked last in clinical VBG. CONCLUSIONS: VRA techniques achieving greater VBG are also associated with higher incidence of healing complications. Guided bone regeneration techniques using non-resorbable membranes yield the most favourable results in relation to VBG and complications.

Buccal bone thickness and mid-facial soft tissue recession after various surgical approaches for immediate implant placement: A systematic review and network meta-analysis of controlled trials.

AIM: To evaluate the relative efficacy and confidence in the precision of the results of different surgical interventions for immediate implant placement in the anterior area. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Electronic searches were performed in PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane CENTRAL. Randomized controlled trials comparing different surgical techniques in anterior jaws for type 1 implant placement were included. Outcome measures included implant survival (primary outcome), buccal bone thickness (BBT) reduction, and mid-facial soft tissue recession (MSTR). Risks of bias assessment, network meta-analysis (NMA), sensitivity analysis, and quality-of-evidence assessment were performed. RESULTS: Twenty-two studies reporting on 948 subjects and 5 surgical interventions were included. Fourteen early failures were reported. Compared with open-flap surgery without tissue augmentation (F-N) and looking at BBT preservation, NMA showed that there was moderate confidence that flapless surgery with hard tissue augmentation (FL-HTA) was better than flapless surgery without tissue augmentation (FL-N) or open-flap surgery with hard tissue augmentation (F-HTA) (mean difference -0.8 mm, 95% confidence interval: -1.1 to -0.5 mm; -0.6 mm, -0.9 to -0.4 mm; and -0.5 mm, -0.7 to -0.3 mm, respectively). There was moderate confidence that flapless surgery with hard and soft tissue augmentation (FL-HTA&STA) could significantly prevent MSTR compared with FL-HTA (-0.5 mm, -0.7 to -0.3 mm) and FL-N (-0.6 mm, -1.2 to -0.04 mm). However, there was no significant additional benefit in BBT with the FL-HTA&STA approach compared to the FL-HTA approach (-0.30 mm, -0.81 to 0.21 mm). CONCLUSIONS: For immediate implant placement in the anterior areas, the FL-HTA approach better preserves BBT (moderate confidence); adding STA improves the stability of the mid-facial soft tissue level (moderate confidence) but at the expense of BBT (low confidence).

Evaluation Of Gingival Biotype And Recession Following Non-Surgical Periodontal Treatment Using 3-Dimensional Scan Methods.

The study evaluated the position of gingival margins in anterior teeth using clinical and 3-dimensional (3D) optical scanning method among patients subjected to non surgical periodontal treatment (NSPT). A single arm, longitudinal study was undertaken at the Archway Dental Center, University of Manchester, UK. History and clinical examination were done. Gingival recession, attachment loss (AL), and periodontal probing depth (PD) were recorded at baseline and 12-weeks follow-up. NSPT was done using hand and ultrasonic instruments. Impressions were made, the resultant gypsum models were scanned to generate 3D images. The change in the gingival level and thickness of facial gingiva were assessed. Out of eight patientsrecruited, three were lost to follow up. The 3D scan showed a poor correlation with the clinical assessment of gingival recession in anterior teeth following NSPT (r=- 0.0089). Recession did not improve after NSPT (p= 0.20).

Recurrence and progression of periodontitis and methods of management in long-term care: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

AIM: To systematically review the literature to evaluate the recurrence of disease of people in long-term supportive periodontal care (SPC), previously treated for periodontitis, and determine the effect of different methods of managing recurrence. The review focused on stage IV periodontitis. MATERIALS AND METHODS: An electronic search was conducted (until May 2020) for prospective clinical trials. Tooth loss was the primary outcome. RESULTS: Twenty-four publications were retrieved to address recurrence of disease in long-term SPC. Eight studies were included in the meta-analyses for tooth loss, and three studies for disease progression/recurrence (clinical attachment level [CAL] loss ≥2 mm). For patients in SPC of 5-20 years, prevalence of losing more than one tooth was 9.6% (95% confidence interval [CI] 5%-14%), while experiencing more than one site of CAL loss ≥2 mm was 24.8% (95% CI 11%-38%). Six studies informed on the effect of different methods of managing recurrence, with no clear evidence of superiority between methods. No data was found specifically for stage IV periodontitis. CONCLUSIONS: A small proportion of patients with stage III/IV periodontitis will experience tooth loss in long-term SPC (tendency for greater prevalence with time). Regular SPC appears to be important for reduction of tooth loss. No superior method to manage disease recurrence was found.

Comparison of clinical outcomes of immediate versus delayed placement of dental implants: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVE: Two focused questions were addressed: Focused question (Q1) 1) Are there any differences between immediate and delayed placement in terms of (i) survival rate, (ii) success rate, (iii) radiographic marginal bone levels, (iv) height/(v)thickness of buccal wall, (vi) peri-implant mucosal margin position, (vii) aesthetics outcomes and (viii) patient reported outcomes? Focused question 2 (Q2) What is the estimated effect size of immediate implant placement for all parameters included in Q1? MATERIALS AND METHODS: An electronic search (MEDLINE, EMBASE, The Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials and OpenGray) and hand search were conducted up to November 2019. Randomised controlled trials (RCT) with delayed implant placement as controls were eligible in the analysis for Q1. Immediate dental implant arms RCTs, controlled clinical trials (CCTs) and prospective case series of immediate implant placement were eligible in the analysis for Q2. RESULTS: Six papers (RCTs) were included in the analysis for Q1 and 53 papers (22 RCTs, 11 CCTs and 20 case series) for Q2. Q1: Meta-analyses did not show any significant difference in implant survival, but it did for bone levels and PES scores at 1 year post-loading, favouring the immediate group. Q2: Meta-analyses showed that immediate implants had a high survival rate (97%) and presented high PES scores (range 10.36 to 11.25). Information regarding marginal bone loss and gingival/papillary recession varied among all included studies. CONCLUSION: Similar survival rate was found between immediate and delayed implants. Immediate implants presented threefold early complications and twofold delayed complications. Success criteria should be reported more consistently, and the incidence/type of complications associated with immediate implants should be further explored.

Immediate implant placement in fresh alveolar sockets with a minimal split-thickness envelope flap: A randomised controlled clinical trial.

OBJECTIVES: Comparing PES/WES scores, modified success rate, survival, success, buccal bone thickness and patient-reported outcomes of immediate dental implants placed in fresh alveolar sockets using a flap or a minimal split-thickness envelope flap (MSTEF). MATERIALS AND METHODS: Implants following random assignment into a flap or MSTEF group were placed immediately in anterior and premolar areas. Guided bone regeneration and autogenous connective tissue graft were used in all cases. A temporary prosthesis was provided followed by the final prosthesis at 16-18 weeks. Success and survival rates together with radiographic buccal bone thickness and patient satisfaction were evaluated at 12-month post-loading. The aesthetic outcome was evaluated through the Pink (PES) and White (WES) Aesthetic Score by 8 blind clinicians of different training background and incorporated in modified success criteria. RESULTS: 28 implants were placed on 28 patients. No statistically significant differences were noted in PES (10.54 control versus 10.80 test), WES scores (6.97 control versus 6.95 test) or success criteria including aesthetic parameters (modified success criteria) for the different specialty groups (Range 69%-92%). In addition, no statistically significant differences were noted in survival (100%), success (100%), buccal wall thickness between control (0.72 ± 0.22) and test group (0.92 ± 0.31) and patients' reported outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: Immediate dental implant treatment with flap/ MSTEF provided similar mean PES/WES scores, modified success rate, survival, mean buccal bone levels and patients' satisfaction. However, aesthetic failures were common in both groups.

Regenerative surgical treatment of furcation defects: A systematic review and Bayesian network meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials.

AIMS: To investigate the clinical performance of regenerative periodontal surgery in the treatment of furcation defects versus open flap debridement (OFD) and to compare different regenerative modalities. MATERIAL AND METHODS: A systematic search was conducted to identify RCTs evaluating regenerative surgical treatment of furcations with a minimum of 12-month follow-up. Three authors independently reviewed, selected and extracted data from the search conducted and assessed risk of bias. Primary outcomes were tooth loss, furcation improvement (closure/conversion) (FImp), gain of horizontal bone level (HBL) and attachment level (HCAL). Secondary outcomes were gain in vertical attachment level (VCAL), probing pocket depth (PPD) reduction, PROMs and adverse events. Data were summarized into Bayesian standard and network meta-analysis in order to estimate direct and indirect treatment effects and to establish a ranking of treatments. RESULTS: The search identified 19 articles, reporting on 20 RCTs (19 on class II, 1 on class III furcations) with a total of 575 patients/787 defects. Tooth loss was not reported. Furcation closure ranged between 0% and 60% (10 trials), and class I conversion from 29% to 100% (six trials). Regenerative techniques were superior to OFD for FImp (OR = 20.9; 90% CrI = 5.81, 69.41), HCAL gain (1.6 mm), VCAL gain (1.3 mm) and PPD reduction (1.3 mm). Bone replacement grafts (BRG) resulted in the highest probability (Pr = 61%) of being the best treatment for HBL gain. Non-resorbable membranes + BRG ranked as the best treatment for VCAL gain (Pr = 75%) and PPD reduction (Pr = 56%). CONCLUSIONS: Regenerative surgery of class II furcations is superior to OFD. FImp (furcation closure or class I conversion) can be expected for the majority of defects. Treatment modalities involving BRG are associated with higher performance.

Clinical efficacy of minimally invasive surgical (MIS) and non-surgical (MINST) treatments of periodontal intra-bony defect. A systematic review and network meta-analysis of RCT's.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this systematic review was to explore the efficacy of different minimal invasive surgical (MIS) and non-surgical (MINST) approaches for the treatment of intra-bony defect in terms of clinical attachment level (CAL) gain and periodontal pocket depth (PPD) reduction. METHODS: A detailed review protocol was designed according to PRISMA guideline. Online search was conducted on PubMed, Cochrane library and Embase. Only randomized clinical trials (RCTs) testing MIS or MINST procedure, with or without the application of a regenerative tool for the treatment of intra-bony defect, were included. Cochrane checklist for risk of bias assessment was used. Network meta-Analysis (NMAs) was used to rank the treatment efficacy. RESULTS: Nine RCTs accounting for 244 patients and a total of 244 defects were included. Only two studies were at low risk of bias. CAL gain for included treatment ranged from 2.58 ± 1.13 mm to 4.7 ± 2.5 mm while PPD reduction ranged from 3.19 ± 0.71 mm to 5.3 ± 1.5 mm. On the basis of the ranking curve, MINST showed the lowest probability to be the best treatment option for CAL gain. Pairwise comparisons and treatment rankings suggest superiority for regenerative approaches (CAL difference 0.78 mm, (0.14-1.41); P < 0.05) and surgical treatment elevating only the buccal or palatal flap (CAL difference: 0.95 mm, (0.33-1.57); P < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Minimally invasive surgical (MIS) and non-surgical (MINST) periodontal therapy show promising results in the treatment of residual pocket with intra-bony defect. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: MIS procedures represent a reliable treatment for isolated intra-bony defect.

Antibiotic prophylaxis at dental implant placement: Which is the best protocol? A systematic review and network meta-analysis.

AIM: This systematic review of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) aims to answer to the following question: "In patients undergoing dental implant placement, which is the best antibiotic prophylaxis protocol to prevent early failures?" MATERIALS AND METHODS: The MEDLINE, SCOPUS, CENTRAL and Web of Knowledge electronic databases were searched in duplicate for RCTs up to July 2017. Additional relevant literature was identified through (i) handsearching on both relevant journals and reference lists, and (ii) searching in databases for grey literature. A network meta-analysis (NMA) was conducted, and the probability that each protocol is the "Best" was estimated. RESULTS: Nine RCTs were included, with a total of 1,693 participants. Due to the few events reported, it was not possible to conduct a NMA for adverse events, therefore it was conducted only for implant failures (IF). The protocol with the highest probability (32.5%) of being the "Best" one to prevent IF was the single dose of 3 g of amoxicillin administered 1 hr pre-operatively. Even if the single pre-operative dose of 2 g of amoxicillin is the most used, it achieved only a probability of 0.2% to be the "Best" one. CONCLUSIONS: Basing on the available RCTs, the use of antibiotic prophylaxis is protective against early implant failures. Whenever an antibiotic prophylaxis is needed, there is still insufficient evidence to confidently recommend a specific dosage. The use of post-operative courses does not seem however to be justified by the available literature. Prospero registration number: CRD42015029708.

Root coverage procedures for treating localised and multiple recession-type defects.

BACKGROUND: Gingival recession is defined as the oral exposure of the root surface due to a displacement of the gingival margin apical to the cemento-enamel junction and it is regularly linked to the deterioration of dental aesthetics. Successful treatment of recession-type defects is based on the use of predictable root coverage periodontal plastic surgery (RCPPS) procedures. This review is an update of the original version that was published in 2009. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the efficacy of different root coverage procedures in the treatment of single and multiple recession-type defects. SEARCH METHODS: Cochrane Oral Health's Information Specialist searched the following databases: Cochrane Oral Health's Trials Register (to 15 January 2018), the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL; 2017, Issue 12) in the Cochrane Library (searched 15 January 2018), MEDLINE Ovid (1946 to 15 January 2018), and Embase Ovid (1980 to 15 January 2018). The US National Institutes of Health Ongoing Trials Register (ClinicalTrials.gov) and the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform were searched for ongoing trials (15 January 2018). No restrictions were placed on the language or date of publication when searching the electronic databases. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) only of at least 6 months' duration evaluating recession areas (Miller's Class I or II ≥ 3 mm) and treated by means of RCPPS procedures. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Screening of eligible studies, data extraction and risk of bias assessment were conducted independently and in duplicate. Authors were contacted for any missing information. We expressed results as random-effects models using mean differences (MD) for continuous outcomes and odds ratios (OR) for dichotomous outcomes with 95% confidence intervals (CI). We used GRADE methods to assess the quality of the body of evidence of our main comparisons. MAIN RESULTS: We included 48 RCTs in the review. Of these, we assessed one as at low risk of bias, 12 as at high risk of bias and 35 as at unclear risk of bias. The results indicated a greater reduction in gingival recession for subepithelial connective tissue grafts (SCTG) + coronally advanced flap (CAF) compared to guided tissue regeneration with resorbable membranes (GTR rm) + CAF (MD -0.37 mm; 95% CI -0.60 to -0.13, P = 0.002; 3 studies; 98 participants; low-quality evidence). There was insufficient evidence of a difference in gingival recession reduction between acellular dermal matrix grafts (ADMG) + CAF and SCTG + CAF or between enamel matrix protein (EMP) + CAF and SCTG + CAF. Regarding clinical attachment level changes, GTR rm + CAF promoted additional gains compared to SCTG + CAF (MD 0.35; 95% CI 0.06 to 0.63, P = 0.02; 3 studies; 98 participants; low-quality evidence) but there was insufficient evidence of a difference between ADMG + CAF and SCTG + CAF or between EMP + CAF and SCTG + CAF. Greater gains in the keratinized tissue were found for SCTG + CAF when compared to EMP + CAF (MD -1.06 mm; 95% CI -1.36 to -0.76, P < 0.00001; 2 studies; 62 participants; low-quality evidence), and SCTG + CAF when compared to GTR rm + CAF (MD -1.77 mm; 95% CI -2.66 to -0.89, P < 0.0001; 3 studies; 98 participants; very low-quality evidence). There was insufficient evidence of a difference in keratinized tissue gain between ADMG + CAF and SCTG + CAF. Few data exist on aesthetic condition change related to patients' opinion and patients' preference for a specific procedure. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Subepithelial connective tissue grafts, coronally advanced flap alone or associated with other biomaterial and guided tissue regeneration may be used as root coverage procedures for treating localised or multiple recession-type defects. The available evidence base indicates that in cases where both root coverage and gain in the width of keratinized tissue are expected, the use of subepithelial connective tissue grafts shows a slight improvement in outcome. There is also some weak evidence suggesting that acellular dermal matrix grafts appear as the soft tissue substitute that may provide the most similar outcomes to those achieved by subepithelial connective tissue grafts. RCTs are necessary to identify possible factors associated with the prognosis of each RCPPS procedure. The potential impact of bias on these outcomes is unclear.

Periodontal regeneration compared with access flap surgery in human intra-bony defects 20-year follow-up of a randomized clinical trial: tooth retention, periodontitis recurrence and costs.

AIM: Compare the long-term outcomes and costs of three treatment modalities in intra-bony defects. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Forty-five intra-bony defects in 45 patients had been randomly allocated to receive: modified papilla preservation technique with titanium-reinforced expanded-polytetrafluoroethylene (ePTFE) membranes (MPPT Tit, N = 15); access flap with expanded-PTFE membranes (Flap-ePTFE, N = 15) and access flap alone (Flap, N = 15). Supportive periodontal care (SPC) was provided monthly for 1 year, then every 3 months for 20 years. Periodontal therapy was delivered to sites showing recurrences. RESULTS: Forty-one patients complied with SPC. Four subjects were lost to follow-up. Clinical attachment-level differences between 1 and 20 years were -0.1 ± 0.3 mm (p = 0.58) in the MPPT Tit; -0.5 ± 0.1 mm (p = 0.003) in the Flap-ePTFE and -1.7 ± 0.4 mm (p < 0.001) in the Flap. At 20 years, sites treated with Flap showed greater attachment loss compared to MPPT Tit (1.4 ± 0.4 mm; p = 0.008) and to Flap-ePTFE (1.1 ± 0.4 mm; p = 0.03). Flap group lost two treated teeth. Five episodes of recurrences occurred in the MPPT Tit, six in the Flap-ePTFE and fifteen in the Flap group. Residual pocket depth at 1-year was significantly correlated with the number of recurrences (p = 0.002). Sites treated with flap had greater OR for recurrences and higher costs of re-intervention than regenerated sites over a 20-year follow-up period with SPC. CONCLUSIONS: Regeneration provided better long-term benefits than Flap: no tooth loss, less periodontitis progression and less expense from re-intervention over a 20-year period. These benefits need to be interpreted in the context of higher immediate costs associated with regenerative treatment. These initial observations need to be extended to larger groups and broader clinical settings.

Root coverage procedures improve patient aesthetics. A systematic review and Bayesian network meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: The aim of this study was to perform a systematic review (SR) of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) to explore if periodontal plastic surgery procedures for the treatment of single and multiple gingival recessions (Rec) may improve aesthetics at patient and professional levels. MATERIAL AND METHODS: In order to combine evidence from direct and indirect comparisons by different trials a Bayesian network meta-analysis (BNM) was planned. A literature search on PubMed, Cochrane libraries, EMBASE, and hand-searched journals until January 2016 was conducted to identify RCTs presenting aesthetic outcomes after root coverage using standardized evaluations at patient and professional level. RESULTS: A total of 16 RCTs were selected in the SR; three RTCs presenting professional aesthetic evaluation with Root coverage Aesthetic Score (RES) and three showing final self-perception using the Visual Analogue Scale (VAS Est) could be included in a BNM model. Coronally Advanced Flap plus Connective Tissue Graft (CAF + CTG) and CAF + Acellular Dermal Matrix (ADM) and Autologous Fibroblasts (AF) were associated with the best RES outcomes (best probability = 24% and 64%, respectively), while CAF + CTG and CAF + CTG + Enamel matrix Derivatives (EMD) obtained highest values of VAS Est score (best probability = 44% and 26%, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Periodontal Plastic Surgery (PPS) techniques applying grafts underneath CAF with or without the adding of EMD are associated with improved aesthetics assessed by final patient perception and RES as professional evaluation system.

Influence of inter-dental tissues and root surface condition on complete root coverage following treatment of gingival recessions: a 1-year retrospective study.

AIM: To explore the influence of inter-dental tissues and root surface condition on complete root coverage following surgical treatment of gingival recessions. METHODS: Three hundred and eighty-six single recessions treated over 28 years were assessed. Patient-level and periodontal variables, presence/loss of inter-dental tissues, and presence/absence of non-carious cervical lesions (NCCLs) were recorded. Root coverage was assessed 1-year post-surgery. Multilevel analysis was performed to identify predictors of CRC. RESULTS: Based on type of root coverage procedure four patient groups were created: free gingival graft (FGG) (n = 116), coronally advanced flap (CAF) (n = 107), CAF+connective tissue graft (CTG) (n = 131), and guided tissue regeneration (GTR) (n = 32). Percentages of complete root coverage (CRC) were 18.1% for FGG, 35.5% for CAF, 35.1% for CAF+CTG, and 18.8% for GTR. There was an OR = 0.26 (p < 0.0001) of achieving CRC in cases with loss of inter-dental tissue compared with cases with no inter-dental tissue loss. Similarly, cases with presence of NCCL showed an OR = 0.28 (p < 0.0001) of achieving CRC compared with cases without a NCCL. FGG achieved less CRC then CAF+CTG (p = 0.0012; OR = 0.32). CONCLUSIONS: NCCLs, just like inter-dental tissue loss, are significant negative prognostic factors in achieving CRC following root coverage procedures.

Soft-tissue re-growth following fibre retention osseous resective surgery or osseous resective surgery: a multilevel analysis.

BACKGROUND: The aim of this study was to assess soft-tissue re-growth following Fibre Retention Osseous Resective Surgery (FibReORS) or Osseous Resective Surgery (ORS) over a 12-month healing period. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Thirty patients with chronic periodontitis showing persistent periodontal pockets at posterior natural teeth after cause-related therapy were enroled. Periodontal pockets were associated with infrabony defect ≤3 mm; 15 patients were randomly assigned to FibReORS (test group) and 15 to ORS (control group). Measurements were performed by a blind and calibrated examiner. Soft-tissue rebound after flap suture was monitored by changes in gingival recession at 1-, 3-, 6-, and 12- month follow-up. Multilevel analysis considering patient, site, and time levels was performed. RESULTS: Greater osseous resection during surgery and higher post surgical gingival recession was observed in the ORS group. The mean amount of soft-tissue rebound following surgery was 2.5 mm for ORS-treated sites and 2.2 mm for FibReORS-treated sites. Approximately 90% of the coronal re-growth was detectable after 6 months for both procedures. The interaction between ORS and time of observation showed a higher soft-tissue rebound after 12 months (p = 0.0233) for ORS-treated sites. CONCLUSIONS: Both procedures showed a similar coronal soft-tissue re-growth with a significant higher recession reduction for ORS-treated sites. Significant clinical stability of the gingival margin is obtained 6 months after surgery for both procedures.

Long-term outcomes of soft tissue augmentation around dental implants on soft and hard tissue stability: a systematic review.

AIM: To investigate whether the height and volume of the soft tissues and peri-implant bone levels around dental implants are stable, when soft tissue augmentation has been performed. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Three operators conducted a search on electronic databases (MEDLINE, COCHRANE, EMBASE) and a hand searching on the main journals dealing with periodontology and implantology until 30 October 2014. Only articles that considered peri-implant soft tissue augmentation performed in a group of at least 10 patients and with a follow-up of at least 1 year were selected. The outcome variables were peri-implant attached/keratinized tissue width (KTW) changes, peri-implant marginal soft tissue level (PSL) changes, and peri-implant marginal bone level (PBL) changes. The review was performed according to the PRISMA statements. RESULTS: Ten articles were selected for the qualitative synthesis, but only one meta-analysis was accomplished, indicating that 1 year after implant recession coverage procedures, a mean gain of 1.65 ± 0.01 mm (90% CrI [1.44; 1.85]) was observed. CONCLUSIONS: There is no long-term evidence whether augmented soft tissues can be maintained over time and able to influence the peri-implant bone levels.

In vitro comparison of bonding effectiveness of different adhesive strategies.

ABSTRACT: Purpose: To compare the bond strength to human dentin for a variety of adhesive materials, including self-adhesive resin composites, self-etch and etch-and-rinse adhesive systems and glass-ionomer cement by means of micro shear bond strength (µSBS) test and SEM observations. METHODS: Seventy-two human molars were sectioned to obtain a 2 mm-thick slab of mid-coronal dentin and were subsequently randomly divided into nine groups (n = 8). Nine conical frustum-shaped build-ups were constructed on the occlusal surface of each dentin slab using bonding agents (Group 1: OptiBond FL; Group 2: OptiBond XTR) combined with a resin composite (Premise Flow), self-adhesive resin composites (Group 3: RelyX Unicem; Group 4: RelyX Unicem 2; Group 5: SmartCem2; Group 6: SpeedCEM; Group 7: Maxcem Elite; Group 8: Vertise Flow) and a glass-ionomer cement (Group 9: Ketac-Fil). Specimens were subjected to µSBS test and observed with SEM. Data were analyzed by a mixed model and chi-square test. RESULTS: The bond strengths measured in Groups 3-9 were significantly lower than those recorded in Groups 1 and 2. There were no significant differences in bond strengths between Groups 1 and 2 or between Groups 4 through 8. The bond strength measured in Group 9 was significantly lower than those recorded in Groups 4, 5, and 6 but was not significantly different than those recorded in Groups 3, 7, and 8. Failures were mainly adhesive in all groups.

Bayesian network meta-analysis of root coverage procedures: ranking efficacy and identification of best treatment.

AIMS: The aim of this work was to conduct a Bayesian network meta-analysis (NM) of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) to establish a ranking in efficacy and the best technique for coronally advanced flap (CAF)-based root coverage procedures. MATERIAL AND METHODS: A literature search on PubMed, Cochrane libraries, EMBASE, and hand-searched journals until June 2012 was conducted to identify RCTs on treatments of Miller Class I and II gingival recessions with at least 6 months of follow-up. The treatment outcomes were recession reduction (RecRed), clinical attachment gain (CALgain), keratinized tissue gain (KTgain), and complete root coverage (CRC). RESULTS: Twenty-nine studies met the inclusion criteria, 20 of which were classified as at high risk of bias. The CAF+connective tissue graft (CTG) combination ranked highest in effectiveness for RecRed (Probability of being the best = 40%) and CALgain (Pr = 33%); CAF+enamel matrix derivative (EMD) was slightly better for CRC; CAF+Collagen Matrix (CM) appeared effective for KTgain (Pr = 69%). Network inconsistency was low for all outcomes excluding CALgain. CONCLUSION: CAF+CTG might be considered the gold standard in root coverage procedures. The low amount of inconsistency gives support to the reliability of the present findings.

Immediate loading with LASER-treated surface implant: two-year resonance frequency analysis follow-up.

BACKGROUND: The chemical, physical, and morphologic characteristics of the implant surface play a fundamental role during the osteointegration process. Implant design is of paramount importance in determining implant primary stability and implant ability to sustain loading during and after osteointegration. LASER treatment of the surface allows defining the precise parameters of roughness to obtain a regular and repeatable surface in total absence of contamination. PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to analyze the behavior of implant stability of LASER-treated surface implants by repeated resonance frequency analysis (RFA) measurements during 2 years in patients with complete upper maxilla edentulism subject to an immediate-loading protocol. METHODS: Ten patients were included, and each treated with the insertion of 6 or 8 LASER surface implants according to the individual surgical-prosthetic planning. During the bone drilling and implant insertion, torque values were monitored with a specific handpiece and software. All implants were loaded within 24 hours from the insertion with the application of a temporary full-arch prosthesis. Subsequent follow-up has been done at 24 months from the loading with radiographic controls (OPT) and RFA measurement on all implants at time of implant insertion and at 1, 3, 6, 12, and 24 months from loading. RESULTS: Resonance frequency analyses at 3 and 6 months from the implant loading have shown a rapid increment of implant stability quotient (ISQ) values in the first phases of bone remodeling, subsequent to the peri-implant bone remodeling. The paired comparisons between mean ISQ values by patient showed a statistically significant decrease in primary stability from baseline up to 1 month (P = 0.0039). Subsequent measurements revealed a statistically significant increase in implant stability from 1 up to 3 months (P = 0.0156), from 3 up to 6 months (P = 0.0020), from 6 up to 12 months (P = 0.020), and 12 up to 24 months (P = 0.0391). CONCLUSIONS: Resonance frequency analysis of the LASER-treated surface implants showed good ISQ values at all time point measurements. These results are consistent with data from literature on the analysis of RFA in protocols of immediate loading at the upper maxilla.

Evaluation of the literature: evidence assessment tools for clinicians.

The progressive improvement in the quality of scientific articles has led to an increase in difficulty in reading and interpreting them so that now clinical knowledge and experience must be complemented by methodological, statistical and computer skills. The aim of this article is to offer practitioners the tools, the simplest keys, that will allow them to understand and critically judge the results of scientific studies. The "peer-review" process of a clinical article submitted to a journal is described and the Science Citation Index and the Impact Factor are presented to the reader as essential instruments to evaluate a specific article's impact and the impact of a given journal on the scientific world, respectively. An article should be evaluated on the basis of some key issues which include, at least, an assessment of methodological aspects, a critical analysis of the statistical component and a proper understanding of the clinical impact of the study outcomes. The standard approach for evaluating the quality of individual studies is based on a hierarchical grading system of research design which represents an essential tool to identify the strength of the evidence of an article. Many different biases may affect the reliability of study results. Randomized Control Trials (RCTs) and Systematic Reviews (SRs) are able to minimize the number of biases and thus are at the highest level of the scale of evidence representing the final steps of a treatment's "career." Finally, moving from research to clinical practice, attention on the clinical impact of study's outcomes is of paramount importance as the literature contains studies (including RCTs) that present statistically significant results but which, from the clinical standpoint, are only relatively or not at all significant. Clinical Practice Guidelines represent a useful tool for practitioners assisting the decision-making process when choosing the most appropriate treatment for their patients.