Augmentation of keratinized tissue using autogenous soft-tissue grafts and collagen-based soft-tissue substitutes at teeth and dental implants: Histological findings in a pilot pre-clinical study.

AIM: To histomorphometrically assess three treatment modalities for gaining keratinized tissue (KT) at teeth and at dental implants. MATERIALS AND METHODS: In five dogs, the distal roots of the mandibular second, third and fourth premolars were extracted. Dental implants were placed at the distal root areas 2 months later. After another 2 months, KT augmentation was performed at both distal (implants) and at mesial root (teeth) areas in the presence (wKT groups) or absence (w/oKT groups) of a KT band at the mucosal/gingival level. Three treatment modalities were applied randomly: apically positioned flap only (APF), free gingival grafts (FGGs) and xenogeneic collagen matrices (XCMs). A combination of the above produced six groups. Two months later, tissue sections were harvested and analysed histomorphometrically. RESULTS: The median KT height and length were greatest at implants with FGG in both wKT (3.7 and 5.1 mm, respectively) and w/oKT groups (3.7 and 4.6 mm), and at teeth with FGG in wKT groups (3.7 and 6.1 mm) and with APF in the w/oKT groups (3.9 and 4.4 mm). The XCM and APF produced more favourable results at teeth than at implants. CONCLUSIONS: FGG was advantageous in gaining KT, especially at implants.

Enhancing guided bone regeneration with cross-linked collagen-conjugated xenogeneic bone blocks and membrane fixation: A preclinical in vivo study.

OBJECTIVE: To determine whether combining cross-linked (CL) collagen-integrated xenogeneic bone blocks stabilized with the fixation of resorbable collagen membranes (CM) can enhance guided bone regeneration (GBR) in the overaugmented calvarial defect model. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Four circular defects with a diameter of 8 mm were prepared in the calvarium of 13 rabbits. Defects were randomly assigned to receive one of the following treatments: (i) non-cross-linked (NCL) porcine-derived collagen-embedded bone block covered by a CM without fixation (NCL + unfix group); (ii) NCL bone block covered by CM with fixation using bone-tack (NCL + fix group); (iii) cross-linked (CL) porcine-derived collagen-embedded bone block covered by CM without fixation (CL + unfix group); and (iv) CL bone block covered by CM with fixation using bone-tack fixation (CL + fix group). The efficacy of GBR was assessed through histological and molecular analyses after 2 and 8 weeks. RESULTS: At 2 weeks, there were no significant differences in histologically measured areas of newly formed bone among the groups. At 8 weeks, however, the CL + fix group exhibited a larger area of new bone (5.08 ± 1.09 mm2, mean ± standard deviation) compared to the NCL + unfix (1.62 ± 0.42 mm2; p < .0083), NCL + fix (3.97 ± 1.39 mm2) and CL + unfix (2.55 ± 1.04 mm2) groups. Additionally, the expression levels of tumour necrosis factor-alpha, fibroblast growth factor-2, vascular endothelial growth factor, osteocalcin and calcitonin receptor were significantly higher in the CL + fix group compared to the other three groups (p < .0083). CONCLUSION: Cross-linked bone blocks stabilized with collagen membrane fixation can significantly enhance GBR.

Early implant placement versus ridge preservation and delayed implant placement: Analysis of profilometric, clinician- and patient-reported outcomes from a two-centre RCT.

OBJECTIVES: To compare early implant placement (EP) to alveolar ridge preservation and delayed implant placement (ARP/DP) in terms of contour changes, along with clinician- and patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) until the delivery of the implant-supported restoration. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Patients with a failing single tooth in the maxilla or mandible were recruited in two centres. After tooth extraction, patients were randomly assigned (1:1) to either EP or ARP/DP. At abutment connection and crown delivery, the buccal contour changes at 3 mm below the mucosal margin (primary outcome) along with clinician- (ease of treatment) and patient-reported outcomes were assessed using numeric rating scales and OHIP-14. RESULTS: A total of 46 patients were analysed. The mean buccal contour at abutment connection decreased by -1.2 ± 0.6 mm in group EP and -1.6 ± 0.8 mm in group ARP/DP (estimated mean difference; 0.45 [95%CI, -0.02; 0.94]; p = .061) with no significant differences between the groups. ARP/DP was consistently easier than EP across all stages of the surgery (estimated mean difference; 2.0 [95%CI, 1.3; 2.7] p < .001): during flap elevation (EP: 4.8 vs. ARP/DP: 1.6), implant placement (EP: 5.7 vs. ARP/DP: 2.2) and wound closure (EP: 3.4 vs. ARP/DP: 1.6). Both interventions improved quality of life but patients who underwent ARP/DP were significantly more satisfied at the time of crown delivery (ARP/DP: 9.6 vs. EP: 9.1, p = .02). CONCLUSIONS: EP and ARP/DP show no significant differences in buccal contour changes, aesthetics and patient-reported outcomes. However, ARP/DP is an easier procedure at all stages of the surgery compared to EP and could therefore be the preferred therapy for less experienced clinicians.

Immediate loading of definitive restorations in partially edentulous patients requiring an implant-supported prosthesis: A scoping review.

STATEMENT OF PROBLEM: Interest is growing in immediately loading definitive implant-supported prostheses. However, it appears that implant protocols are evolving faster than their scientific validation. PURPOSE: The purpose of this scoping review was to identify the current trends, feasibility, and clinical outcomes of a specific clinical loading scenario (type A), where a single definitive implant-retained restoration is delivered within 3 days. The focus question was "In partially edentulous patients requiring an implant-retained prosthesis (population), is immediate loading with a definitive restoration (concept) a viable treatment option (context)?" MATERIAL AND METHODS: An electronic search was conducted in the PubMed, CENTRAL, Scopus, Embase, and Web of Science databases. Two authors independently reviewed the studies, screened titles and abstracts, and performed full-text analysis. Cross-reference checks within the bibliography of included studies, relevant reviews, and guideline were conducted. Bibliometric information and study details were extracted. RESULTS: The search identified 2568 titles after removing duplicates. Four studies involving 91 participant and 100 implant-retained restorations were included in this scoping review. The selected articles were a randomized controlled trial (RCT), a prospective clinical study, and the remaining 2 were case series. The follow-up periods investigated ranged from 6 to 26 months. All studies evaluated marginal bone loss as a primary outcome, and only 1 implant failure was reported. Patient-reported outcome measures were favorable, and no major biological or technical complications were reported in any study. CONCLUSIONS: Immediate loading with a definitive restoration within 3 days appears to be a suitable approach in specific clinical situations.

Use of optical see-through head-mounted devices in dentistry - a scoping review.

AIM: The aim of this scoping review was to identify the scientific evidence related to the utilization of Optical See- Through Head-Mounted Display (OST-HMD) in dentistry, and to determine future research needs. METHODS: The research question was formulated using the "Population" (P), "Concept" (Cpt), and "Context" (Cxt) framework for scoping reviews. Existing literature was designated as P, OST-HMD as Cpt, and Dentistry as Cxt. An electronic search was conducted in PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and CENTRAL. Two authors independently screened titles and abstracts and performed the full-text analysis. RESULTS: The search identified 286 titles after removing duplicates. Nine studies, involving 138 participants and 1760 performed tests were included in this scoping review. Seven of the articles were preclinical studies, one was a survey, and one was a clinical trial. The included manuscripts covered various dental fields: three studies in orthodontics, two in oral surgery, two in conservative dentistry, one in general dentistry, and the remaining one in prosthodontics. Five articles focused on educational purposes. Two brands of OST-HMD were used: in eight studies HoloLens Microsoft was used, while Google Glass was utilized in one article. CONCLUSIONS: The overall number of included studies was low; therefore, the available data from this review cannot yet support an evidence-based recommendation for the clinical use of OST-HMDs. However, the existing preclinical data indicate a significant capacity for clinical and educational implementation. Further adoption of these devices will facilitate more reliable and objective quality and performance assessments, as well as more direct comparisons with conventional workflows. More clinical studies must be conducted to substantiate the potential benefits and reliability for patients and clinicians.

Minimal invasiveness in soft tissue augmentation at dental implants: A systematic review and meta-analysis of patient-reported outcome measures.

The aim of this study was to compare patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) of soft tissue substitutes versus autogenous grafts for soft tissue augmentation procedures at implant sites. Comprehensive and systematic literature searches were performed until December 2021. A focused question was formulated based on the Population, Intervention, Comparison and Outcome criteria (PICO): In patients with dental implants undergoing soft tissue augmentation (P), do soft tissue substitutes (I) compared to autogenous soft tissue graft (SCTG [subepithelial connective tissue graft]) (C) limit the post-operative morbidity and other patient reported-outcomes measures (O). Randomized controlled clinical trials, prospective-, retrospective- and case-series studies were included. Meta-analyses were performed whenever possible and the results were expressed as weighted mean differences (WMD). A total of 29 clinical studies were included. For mucosal thickness gain, soft tissue substitutes significantly reduced the pain perception compared to SCTG (n = 4; WMD = 14.91 Visual Analog Scale [VAS] units; 95% confidence interval [CI] 6.42-23.40; P < .0006) based on a 0-100 VAS scale. Based on a 0-10 VAS scale, a borderline significance of pain reduction was found when soft tissue substitutes were applied (n = 4; WMD = 1.62 VAS units; 95% CI 0.01-3.23; P = .05). For keratinized tissue gain, soft tissue substitutes significantly reduced the pain perception after keratinized tissue augmentation compared to SCTG based on a 0-100 VAS scale (n = 2; WMD = 21.43 VAS units; 95% CI 12.58-30.28; P < .0001). Based on the 0-10 VAS scale, soft tissue substitutes significantly reduced the pain as compared to SCTG (n = 4; WMD = 1.65 VAS units; 95% CI 0.66-2.64; P = .001). Regarding pain medication, soft tissue substitutes required less painkillers (n = 6; WMD = 1.56 tablets; 95% CI 1.22-1.91; P < .00001) after soft tissue augmentation. The surgery time was significantly reduced when soft tissue substitutes were used (n = 5; WMD = 10.9 minutes; 95% CI 4.60-17.19; P < .00001). There were no significant differences in satisfaction, aesthetics, and quality of life (OHIP-14) between soft tissue substitutes and autogenous grafts following soft tissue augmentation at implants sites. Soft tissue substitutes, compared to autogenous grafts, significantly improve PROMs following soft tissue augmentation at implant sites. Soft tissue substitutes can reduce pain perception, amounts of painkillers and surgery time while achieving similar levels of patient´s satisfaction as autogenous grafts without impairing the clinical outcomes. The current evidence indicates that they constitute a valid and reliable alternative to minimize the invasiveness in soft tissue augmentation procedures at implant sites.

Additively and subtractively manufactured implant-supported fixed dental prostheses: A systematic review.

AIM: To compare and report on the performance of implant-supported fixed dental prostheses (iFDPs) fabricated using additive (AM) or subtractive (SM) manufacturing. METHODS: An electronic search was conducted (Medline, Embase, Cochrane Central, Epistemonikos, clinical trials registries) with a focused PICO question: In partially edentulous patients with missing single (or multiple) teeth undergoing dental implant therapy (P), do AM iFDPs (I) compared to SM iFDPs (C) result in improved clinical performance (O)? Included were studies comparing AM to SM iFDPs (randomized clinical trials, prospective/retrospective clinical studies, case series, in vitro studies). RESULTS: Of 2'184 citations, no clinical study met the inclusion criteria, whereas six in vitro studies proved to be eligible. Due to the lack of clinical studies and considerable heterogeneity across the studies, no meta-analysis could be performed. AM iFDPs were made of zirconia and polymers. For SM iFDPs, zirconia, lithium disilicate, resin-modified ceramics and different types of polymer-based materials were used. Performance was evaluated by assessing marginal and internal discrepancies and mechanical properties (fracture loads, bending moments). Three of the included studies examined the marginal and internal discrepancies of interim or definitive iFDPs, while four examined mechanical properties. Based on marginal and internal discrepancies as well as the mechanical properties of AM and SM iFDPs, the studies revealed inconclusive results. CONCLUSION: Despite the development of AM and the comprehensive search, there is very limited data available on the performance of AM iFDPs and their comparison to SM techniques. Therefore, the clinical performance of iFDPs by AM remains to be elucidated.

Efficacy of a collagen matrix for soft tissue augmentation after implant placement compared to connective tissue grafts: A multicenter, noninferiority, randomized controlled trial.

OBJECTIVES: To test whether soft tissue volume augmentation using a collagen matrix (VCMX) leads to noninferior results in terms of gain of mucosal thickness at single implant sites, compared to connective tissue grafts (SCTG). METHODS: The study was designed as a multi-center randomized controlled clinical trial. Subjects in need of soft tissue volume augmentation at single tooth implant sites were consecutively recruited at nine centers. The deficient mucosal thickness at the implant sites (one per patient) was augmented by applying either a VCMX or a SCTG. Patients were examined at 120 days (abutment connection = primary endpoint), 180 days (final restoration), and 360 days (1-year after insertion of the final restoration). Outcome measures included: transmucosal probing of the mucosal thickness (crestal = primary outcome), profilometric measurements of the tissue volume, and patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs). RESULTS: Out of the 88 patients, 79 attended the one-year follow-up. The median increase of the crestal mucosal thickness between pre-augmentation and 120 days was 0.3 ± 2.1 mm in the VCMX group and 0.8 ± 1.6 mm in the SCTG group (p = .455). Non-inferiority of the VCMX compared to the SCTG was not observed. The respective numbers at the buccal aspect amounted to 0.9 ± 2.0 mm (VCMX) and 1.1 ± 1.4 mm (SCTG; p = .431). PROMs including pain perception favored the VCMX group. CONCLUSION: It remains inconclusive whether soft tissue augmentation using a VCMX is noninferior to SCTG in terms of crestal mucosal thickening at single implant sites. However, the use of collagen matrices favors PROMs especially pain perception, while achieving similar buccal volume gains along with comparable clinical and aesthetic parameters to SCTG.

The 3D emergence profile on implant-supported restorations: A method for evaluating restorative angles.

STATEMENT OF PROBLEM: Emerging evidence indicates that the emergence profile and subsequent restorative angle play a crucial role in clinical outcomes and can potentially affect the development and progression of peri-implant diseases. However, the traditional evaluation of the emergence profile and angle has been limited to mesial and distal sites using periapical x-rays, without considering the buccal sites. PURPOSE: To describe a novel 3D method to estimate the emergence profile and restorative angles around single implant-supported crowns including buccal sites. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of 30 implant-supported crowns (11 molars, 8 premolars, 8 central incisors and 1 canine) were extra-orally scanned using an intraoral scanner and the STL files produced were imported into a 3D software. The crown/abutment interface of each crown was delineated, and apico-coronal lines were automatically drawn following the shape of the crown. Three reference points were defined on the apico-coronal lines at the transition edge of the biological (BC) and the esthetic zone (EC) and the resulting angles were then calculated. The reliability of the measurements (2D and 3D) were assessed using the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC). RESULTS: In anterior restorations, the mean angle of the esthetic zone amounted to 162 ± 14° at mesial sites, to 140 ± 10° at buccal sites and to 163 ± 11° at distal sites. The corresponding angles at the biological zones, amounted to 155 ± 13° at mesial sites, 139 ± 15° at buccal sites and 157 ± 5° at distal sites. In posterior restorations, the mean angle of the esthetic zone amounted to 162 ± 12° at mesial sites, to 157 ± 13 at buccal sites and to 162 ± 11 at distal sites. The corresponding angles at the biological zone, amounted to 158 ± 8 at mesial sites, 150 ± 15° at buccal sites and 156 ± 10 at distal sites. The ICC for all measurements ranged between 0.77 and 0.99 indicating a good intra-examiner reliability. CONCLUSION: Within the limitations of the present study, the 3D analysis seems to be a reliable and applicable method for the quantitative evaluation of the emergence profile in daily practice. Future randomized clinical trials are needed to assess whether a 3D analysis with the ensuing the emergence profile serves as a predictor for clinical outcomes. CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE: The development and implementation of a 3D workflow will provide technicians and dentists with the ability to assess the restorative angle of implant-supported restorations during the provisional phase and the final restoration. This approach may help achieve an aesthetically pleasing restoration while minimizing potential clinical complications.

Anterior implant restorations with a convex emergence profile increase the frequency of recession: 12-month results of a randomized controlled clinical trial.

AIM: To test whether the emergence profile (CONVEX or CONCAVE) of implant-supported crowns influences the mucosal margin stability up to 12 months after insertion of the final restoration. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Forty-seven patients with a single implant in the anterior region were randomly allocated to one of three groups: (1) CONVEX (n = 15), implant provisional and an implant-supported crown both with a convex profile; (2) CONCAVE (n = 16), implant provisional and an implant-supported crown both with a concave profile; (3) CONTROL (n = 16), no provisional (healing abutment only) and an implant-supported crown. All patients were recalled at baseline, 6, and 12 months. The stability of mucosal margin along with clinical, aesthetic, and profilometric outcomes as well as time and costs were evaluated. To predict the presence of recession, multivariable logistic regressions were performed and linear models using generalized estimation equations were conducted for the different outcomes. RESULTS: Forty-four patients were available at 12 months post-loading. The frequency of mucosal recession amounted to 64.3% in group CONVEX, 14.3% in group CONCAVE, and 31.4% in group CONTROL. Regression models revealed that a CONVEX profile was significantly associated with the presence of recessions (odds ratio: 12.6, 95% confidence interval: 1.82-88.48, p = .01) compared with the CONCAVE profile. Pink aesthetic scores amounted to 5.9 in group CONVEX, 6.2 in group CONCAVE, and 5.4 in group CONTROL, with no significant differences between the groups (p = .735). Groups CONVEX and CONCAVE increased the appointments and costs compared with the CONTROL group. CONCLUSIONS: The use of implant-supported provisionals with a CONCAVE emergence profile results in a greater stability of the mucosal margin compared with a CONVEX profile up to 12 months of loading. This is accompanied, however, by increased time and costs compared with the absence of a provisional and may not necessarily enhance the aesthetic outcomes. TRIAL REGISTRATION: German Clinical Trials Register; DRKS00009420.

Restorative angle of zirconia restorations cemented on non-original titanium bases influences the initial marginal bone loss: 5-year results of a prospective cohort study.

AIM: To assess radiographic, restorative, clinical and technical outcomes as well as patient satisfaction of directly veneered zirconia restorations cemented on non-original titanium bases over 5 years. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Twenty-four patients with a single missing tooth in the aesthetic zone were recruited. All patients received a two-piece implant with a screw-retained veneered zirconia restoration cemented extraorally on a titanium base abutment. Marginal bone levels (MBL), marginal bone changes, technical complications, patient satisfaction and clinical parameters including probing depth, bleeding on probing and plaque index were assessed at crown delivery (baseline), at 1 year (FU-1) and 5 years (FU-5) of follow-up. To investigate the relationship between restorative angle and MBL as well as marginal bone changes (bone loss/bone gain), correlation tests and linear regression models were carried out. RESULTS: Twenty-two patients were available for re-examination at 5 years. The mean MBL amounted to 0.54 ± 0.39 mm at baseline, and to 0.24 ± 0.35 at FU-5 (=bone gain) (p < .001). At FU-1, a positive correlation (r = .5) between the mesial restorative angle and mesial MBL was found (p = .012). Marginal bone changes between baseline and FU-1 at mesial sites were also positively correlated with the mesial restorative angle (r = .5; p = .037). Linear and logistic regression models confirmed that mesial marginal bone loss was significantly associated with the mesial restorative angle at FU-1 (p < .05). At 5 years, these significant associations at mesial sites disappeared (p > .05). At distal sites, no correlations or associations between the restorative angle and MBL or marginal bone changes were found regardless of the time point. During the 5-year follow-up, 5 technical complications occurred, mainly within the first year and mostly chippings. All patients were entirely satisfied with their implant-supported restoration at 5 years. CONCLUSION: Within the limitations of the present study, the restorative angle of implant-supported crowns on non-original titanium bases might influence the initial marginal bone loss but without affecting their favourable long-term clinical performance. A restorative angle of <40° may limit the initial marginal bone loss at implant-supported crowns with titanium bases.

Pontic site development for fixed dental prostheses with and without soft tissue grafting: 1-year results of a cohort study.

AIM: To describe and compare the pontic site development for fixed-dental prostheses (FDPs) with and without soft tissue grafting up to one-year post insertion of FDPs. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A convenience sample of 24 patients participating in an ongoing RCT was provided with three-unit tooth-borne FDPs. Six patients received a subepithelial connective tissue graft (SCTG) at the pontic site, whereas 18 patients were treated without any soft tissue graft (CONTROL). Digital impressions were taken prior to tooth preparation, after tooth preparation, after insertion of the final FDP, and at the 1 year of follow-up. The obtained stereolithography files (STL) were superimposed and profilometric as well as linear changes of the soft tissue profile were assessed at the pontic regions. Profilometric outcomes included changes of the ridge contour, the alveolar ridge width, and the crown height of the pontic. Further outcomes assessed included: the papilla index, the pink esthetic score (PES), probing depth (PD), bleeding on probing (BOP), and plaque control record (PCR). Descriptive and nonparametric statistics were applied for all outcome measures. RESULTS: The median profilometric contour between tooth preparation and 1 year after the insertion of the final FDP decreased by - 0.25 mm [Q1, Q3: - 0.36, 0.14] in the CONTROL group and increased by 0.61 mm [Q1, Q3: - 0.18, 1.06] in the SCTG group (intergroup p = 0.038). The alveolar ridge width between prior to tooth preparation and the one-year follow-up amounted to - 0.12 mm [Q1, Q3: - 0.74, 0.70] (= loss) in the CONTROL group and to 2.23 mm [Q1, Q3: 0.62, 3.86] (= gain) in the SCTG group (intergroup p = 0.032). At one year, the median crown height of the pontic tended to decrease by - 1.24 mm [Q1, Q3: - 2.05, - 1.05] in the SCTG group (intragroup p = 0.094) and by - 0.22 mm [Q1, Q3: - 0.58, 0.66] in the CONTROL group (intragroup p = 0.831), with significant differences between the groups (intergroup p = 0.022). The papilla index between prior to tooth preparation and one year of follow-up improved significantly in both groups (p < 0.05). Between FDP delivery and one year of follow-up, the PES values decreased significantly in the CONTROL group (intragroup p = 0.007), while in the SCTG group the change was not significant (intragroup p = 0.875). Clinical parameters (PD, BOP, and PCR) remained stable over time and did not differ between the groups at any time point (intergroup p > 0.05). CONCLUSION: Within the limitations of the present study, soft tissue grafting tends to limit contour changes at pontic sites, thus maintaining the esthetic outcomes over time. The lack of soft tissue grafting results in stable clinical outcomes; however, it may lead to a decrease in aesthetic outcomes over time. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Autogenous soft tissue grafting seems to be a valid therapeutic option for the development of the pontic site to restore ridge defects prior to the delivery of fixed dental prostheses and to limit dimensional changes over time.

Early implant placement with or without alveolar ridge preservation in single tooth gaps renders similar esthetic, clinical and patient-reported outcome measures: One-year results of a randomized clinical trial.

OBJECTIVES: To test whether early implant placement with alveolar ridge preservation (ARP) results in different esthetic, clinical and patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) compared with early implant placement without ARP. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Seventy-five patients requiring single tooth extraction in the anterior maxilla were recruited. Following tooth extraction, the patients were randomly allocated to three groups: (a) ARP using demineralized bovine bone mineral containing 10% collagen (DBBM-C) covered by a collagen matrix (CM) (n = 25), (b) ARP using DBBM-C covered with a palatal graft (PG) (n = 25) and (c) spontaneous healing (control) (n = 25). Eight weeks after tooth extraction, a CBCT was taken and early implant placement was performed in all patients. Esthetic, clinical and PROMs were evaluated one year post-loading. RESULTS: A total of 70 patients were available for re-examination at one year post-loading. The median mid-facial mucosal margin change amounted to -0.02 mm (IQR -0.27-0.46) in the CM group, -0.13 mm (IQR -0.44-0.25) in the PG group and -0.14 mm (IQR -0.29-0.07) in the control group, with no significant differences between the groups. Mean PES scores amounted to 7.0 ± 1.4 in the CM group, 7.1 ± 1.5 in the PG group and 7.3 ± 1.7 in the control group without significant differences between the groups. Plaque, bleeding on probing and probing depth did not differ between treatment groups. PROMs in general revealed no significant differences between the groups. CONCLUSION: Early implant placement with ARP using either a collagen matrix or a palatal graft rendered similar esthetic, clinical and PROMs to early implant placement without ARP. When a failing tooth can be replaced with an implant within 2 months after tooth extraction, the added value of ARP might be clinically negligible.

Efficacy of laser monotherapy or non-surgical mechanical instrumentation in the management of untreated periodontitis patients. A systematic review and meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate and compare the effects of laser monotherapy with non-surgical mechanical instrumentation alone in untreated periodontitis patients. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A focused question was formulated based on the Population, Intervention, Comparison, Outcome, and Study design criteria (PICOS): in patients with untreated periodontitis, does laser mono-therapy provide adjunctive effects on pocket probing depth (PPD) changes compared with non-surgical instrumentation alone? Both randomized controlled clinical trials (RCTs) and controlled clinical trials (CCTs) were included. The results of the meta-analyses are expressed as weighted mean differences (WMD) and reported according to the PRISMA guidelines. RESULTS: The search yielded 1268 records, out of which 8 articles could be included. With respect to PPD changes, a meta-analysis including 5 articles (n = 148) failed to identify statistically significant differences in favor of laser monotherapy for PPD change (WMD = 0.14 mm; 95% CI: - 0.04/0.32; z = 1.51; p = 0.132) nor for clinical attachment level (CAL) (WMD = 0.04 mm; 95% CI: - 0.35/0.42; z = 0.19; p = 0.850). Data on cost-effectiveness are lacking. One study reported patient-related outcome measures (PROMS). CONCLUSIONS: In untreated periodontitis patients, laser monotherapy does not yield superior clinical benefits compared with non-surgical mechanical instrumentation alone. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: In untreated periodontitis patients, mechanical instrumentation with hand and/or ultrasonic instruments remains the standard of care.

The Apical Tooth Replantation with Surgical Intrusion Technique (ATR-SIT) for Regenerative Treatment of Hopeless Teeth: A Report of Two Cases.

The aim of the present clinical report is to introduce a novel surgical procedure, the "Apical Tooth Replantation with Surgical Intrusion Technique" (ATR-SIT) for managing teeth with hopeless prognosis compromised with a severe endodontal-periodontal lesion, pathologic tooth migration, and gingival recession. Two cases are presented managing teeth diagnosed with a hopeless prognosis. ATR-SIT involves tooth extraction, extra-oral root debridement, root surface conditioning, apicectomy, retrograde filling and the application of enamel matrix derivatives prior to reimplantation. Following reimplantation, the teeth are covered with a combination of autogenous bone chips and bone substitute materials, covered with resorbable membranes. Following ATR-SIT, the patients received either orthodontic treatment or tooth-supported fixed dental prostheses. The described ATR-SIT effectively improved the initially hopeless prognosis of the teeth and maintained periodontal health over time, evidenced by favourable clinical and radiographic outcomes. ATR-SIT might be a potential alternative to tooth extraction of hopeless teeth in patients with stage IV periodontitis.

Impact of keratinized mucosa on implant-health related parameters: A 10-year prospective re-analysis study.

AIM: To investigate whether the lack of keratinized mucosa (KM) affects peri-implant health after 10 years of loading. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Data from 74 patients with 148 implants from two randomized controlled studies comparing different implant systems were included and analyzed. Clinical parameters including bleeding on probing (BOP), probing depth (PD), plaque index, marginal bone loss (MBL), and KM width (KMW) at buccal sites were collected at baseline (time of the final prosthesis insertion), 5-year and 10 years postloading. Multivariable logistic and linear regression models by means of a generalized estimated equation (GEE) were used to evaluate the influence of buccal KM on peri-implant clinical parameters; BOP, MBL, PD, and adjusted for implant type (one-piece or two-piece) and compliance. RESULTS: A total of 35 (24.8%) implants were healthy, 67 (47.5%) had mucositis and 39 (27.6%) were affected by peri-implantitis. In absence of buccal KM (KM = 0 mm), 75% of the implants exhibited mucositis, while in the presence of KM (KMW >0 mm) 41.2% exhibited mucositis. Regarding peri-implantitis, the corresponding percentages were 20% (KM = 0 mm) and 26.7% (KM >0 mm). Unadjusted logistic regression showed that the presence of buccal KM tended to reduce the odds of showing BOP at buccal sites (OR: 0.28 [95% CI, 0.07 to 1.09], p = 0.06). The adjusted logistic regression model revealed that having buccal KM (OR: 0.21 [95% CI, 0.05 to 0.85], p = 0.02) and using two-piece implants (OR: 0.34 [95% CI, 0.15 to 0.75], p = 0.008) significantly reduced the odds of showing BOP. Adjusted linear regression by means of GEE showed that KM and two-piece implants were associated with reduced MBL and MBL changes (p < 0.05). CONCLUSION: The lack of buccal KM appears to be linked with peri-implant parameters such as BOP and MBL, but the association is weak. The design of one-piece implants may account for their increased odds of exhibiting BOP.

Timing of soft tissue augmentation around implants: A clinical review and decision tree.

PURPOSE: The goal of soft tissue augmentation is to improve the volume around implants and thus achieve better aesthetic and functional properties. The present review aims to make recommendations and guide clinicians in performing soft tissue augmentation procedures, focusing on the importance of timing. OVERVIEW: Soft tissue augmentation can be performed at different time points: before or after implant placement, at implant placement (immediate/delayed), at healing abutment connection or after final restoration. Before/after implant placement or at healing abutment connection are considered the gold standard time points at which to perform soft tissue augmentation due to the possibility of achieving complete coverage of the soft tissue graft or its substitute through simple flap elevation and the easy handling of tissue. On the other hand, performing soft tissue augmentation at implant placement or after crown delivery seems to be less predictable due to the different healing approaches and the unexpected shrinkage that occurs. CONCLUSION: Timing needs to be considered when performing soft tissue augmentation, taking into account the advantages and disadvantages related to operator experience, implant position and patient expectations. Employing a reliable approach at the appropriate time of intervention could limit complications.

Soft tissue augmentation with a volume-stable collagen matrix or an autogenous connective tissue graft at implant sites: Five-year results of a randomized controlled trial post implant loading.

BACKGROUND: Interventions to augment the mucosal thickness around dental implants are indicated to optimize esthetics and maintain peri-implant health. However, there is a lack of clinical data on the long-term performance of soft tissue substitutes, such as volume-stable collagen matrix (VCMX), compared to autogenous grafts, such as subepithelial connective tissue grafts (SCTGs). This randomized controlled trial aimed to assess 5-year data on clinical and radiographic outcomes at implant sites previously augmented with VCMX or SCTG. METHODS: Twenty patients were randomly assigned for soft tissue augmentation with VCMX or SCTG at single implant sites. Following abutment connection, final restorations were inserted (baseline; BL) and patients were reexamined up to 5 years (FU-5). Measurements included clinical data, marginal bone levels, mucosal thickness, and ridge contour changes. Nonparametric tests and estimates were applied for the statistical analysis. RESULTS: The median buccal mucosal thickness increased by 0.3 mm (Q1: -0.8; Q3: 1.0) in the VCMX group (P = 0.656) and 0.3 mm (Q1: 0.0; Q3: 1.0) in the SCTG group (P = 0.188) between BL and FU-5 (intergroup P = 0.752), while the ridge contour decreased by a median of -0.3 mm (-0.9; -0.1) (P = 0.078) for VCMX and -0.3 mm (-0.4; -0.2) (P = 0.039) for SCTG (intergroup P = 0.817). Peri-implant health was maintained in both groups with stable clinical and radiographic outcomes and without significant differences between the treatments. CONCLUSION: Despite the limited power and considerable dropout rate in the present study, soft tissue augmentation at implant sites with either VCMX or SCTG resulted in similar stable peri-implant tissues, favorable esthetics, and clinically negligible contour changes at 5 years post loading.

Performance of the 2017 AAP/EFP case definition compared with the CDC/AAP definition in population-based studies.

BACKGROUND: Classification of the periodontal conditions is indispensable for epidemiological data in order to guide situational awareness and therapeutic strategies. The new classification of periodontal diseases and conditions introduced by the American Academy of Periodontology and the European Federation of Periodontology (AAP/EFP), however, has not yet been applied to population-based studies. The aim of the present study was to compare the prevalence of periodontitis between the AAP/EFP and the CDC/AAP classification system and to evaluate the accuracy of the new AAP/EFP classification system against the CDC/AAP case definition for population-based studies. METHODS: Epidemiological data from two cross-sectional studies were obtained. One of them was a population-based study on Chilean adults (1.456 individuals; 35-44 years; 65-74 years) and the other one a sample of adolescents (1.070 individuals; 15-19 years) from five countries; Argentina, Chile, Colombia, Ecuador, and Uruguay. All participants had undergone full-mouth periodontal examination by calibrated examiners. Epidemiological datasets were analyzed according to the AAP/EFP and the CDC/AAP case definitions. The accuracy of the AAP/EFP definition was examined by assessing the sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), negative predictive value (NPV), and area under the receiver operating curve (ROC) using the CDC/AAP case definition as the reference standard. RESULTS: According to the AAP/EFP, the prevalence of periodontitis in adolescents was 75.6%. The majority of the adolescents were classified either as Stage I (39.2%) or Stage II (28.2%). By using the CDC/AAP classification the prevalence of periodontitis in adolescents was 27.2%. The most common form of periodontitis with the CDC/AAP classification was moderate periodontitis (15.3%) followed by mild periodontitis (11.4%). The AAP/EFP revealed high sensitivity in moderate (95.7%) and severe periodontitis (100%) as well as a moderate (75%) to high specificity (92%) in moderate and severe periodontitis, respectively. The PPV was 41.6% in moderate and 5.7% in severe periodontitis whereas the NPV was high in both categories (moderate = 99%; severe = 100%). The AUC was 0.91 (95% CI = 0.89-0.93). In adults, the prevalence of periodontitis was 99% according to the AAP/EFP. The majority of adults were classified as Stage IV (81.3%) whereas Stage III amounted to 12.8%. By using the CDC/AAP classification, the prevalence of periodontitis in adults was 88.3% and the most common form of periodontitis was moderate periodontitis (57.2%) followed by severe periodontitis (29.7%). In adults, the AAP/EFP revealed high sensitivity for moderate (99.7%) and severe periodontitis (100%), but low specificity for both categories (moderate = 6.8%; severe = 8.3%). The PPV was 88.7% in moderate and 31.7% in severe periodontitis. The NPV was high in both categories (moderate = 76.5%; severe = 100%). The AUC was 0.57 (95% CI = 0.53-0.62). CONCLUSIONS: This study revealed a clear discrepancy in the prevalence of periodontitis between the AAP/EFP and the CDC/AAP classification when using epidemiological data. The 2017 AAP/EFP classification system performs well when compared to the CDC/AAP case definition in identifying adolescents with periodontitis. The AAP/EFP system seems less accurate in adults with high prevalence of periodontitis.

Radiographic density changes may be associated with overloading and implant loss on short implants: A 5-year analysis of a randomized controlled clinical trial.

OBJECTIVES: To analyze changes in radiographic bone density around short implants with and without cantilevers at 5 years post-loading. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Thirty-six patients with two adjacent posterior missing teeth participated in this randomized controlled clinical trial. All patients were randomly allocated to receive either two short implants (6 mm) with single-unit restorations (group TWO) or one single short implant (6 mm) with a cantilever restoration (group ONE-C). Patients were followed up at 6 months, 1, 3, and 5 years. Radiographic analysis was performed, through an arbitrary gray scale value (GSV) of the peri-implant bone, assessing the changes in radiographic density between groups and between time points. Differences in GSV between groups and over time were calculated using a generalized estimating equation to allow for adjustments for the correlation within individuals and between time points. RESULTS: At 5 years, 26 patients remained in the study (15 in group ONE-C; 11 in group TWO). Implant survival rates were 80.4% in group TWO and 84.2% in group ONE-C (p = 0.894). The radiographic analysis revealed that GSVs increased in both groups over time (p < 0.001). The overall radiographic density was higher in group ONE-C than in group TWO in the maxilla (p = 0.030). Conversely, in the mandible, these significant differences between the groups were not found (p > 0.05). Compared to the implants that survived, the implants that failed demonstrated a distinct radiographic density pattern (p < 0.05). CONCLUSION: Within the limitations of the present study, the radiographic bone density in the maxilla appears to increase distinctly around short implants when cantilevers are used. In contrast, the radiographic density in the mandible appears to be unaffected by the use of a cantilever, suggesting a lower threshold of adaptation to occlusal forces and thus a higher susceptibility to overload and implant loss at earlier time points.