Oral surgery in people with inherited bleeding disorder: A retrospective study.

INTRODUCTION: The objectives were to describe the peri-operative management of people with inherited bleeding disorders in oral surgery and to investigate the association between type of surgery and risk of developing bleeding complications. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This retrospective observational study included patients with haemophilia A or B, von Willebrand disease, Glanzmann thrombasthenia or isolated coagulation factor deficiency such as afibrinogenemia who underwent osseous (third molar extraction, ortho-surgical traction, dental implant placement) or nonosseous oral surgery between 2014 and 2021 at Bordeaux University Hospital (France). Patients and oral surgery characteristics were retrieved from medical records. Odds ratio (OR) and 95% confidence interval (CI) were estimated using logistic regression. RESULTS: Of the 83 patients included, general anaesthesia was performed in 16%. Twelve had a bleeding complication (14.5%) including six after osseous surgery. The most serious complication was the appearance of anti-FVIII inhibitor in a patient with moderate haemophilia A. All bleeding complications were managed by a local treatment and factor injections where indicated. No association was observed between type of surgery (osseous vs. nonosseous) and risk of bleeding complications after controlling for sex, age, disease type and severity, multiple extractions, type of anaesthesia and use of fibrin glue (OR: 3.21, 95% CI: .69-14.88). CONCLUSION: In this study, we have observed that bleeding complications after oral surgery in people with inherited bleeding disorders were moderately frequent and easily managed. However, in this study, we observed a serious complication highlighting the necessity of a thorough benefit-risk balance evaluation during the preoperative planning of the surgical and medical protocol.

Nonionizing diagnostic imaging modalities for visualizing health and pathology of periodontal and peri-implant tissues.

Radiographic examination has been an essential part of the diagnostic workflow in periodontology and implant dentistry. However, radiographic examination unavoidably involves ionizing radiation and its associated risks. Clinicians and researchers have invested considerable efforts in assessing the feasibility and capability of utilizing nonionizing imaging modalities to replace traditional radiographic imaging. Two such modalities have been extensively evaluated in clinical settings, namely, ultrasonography (USG) and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). Another modality, optical coherence tomography (OCT), has been under investigation more recently. This review aims to provide an overview of the literature and summarize the usage of USG, MRI, and OCT in evaluating health and pathology of periodontal and peri-implant tissues. Clinical studies have shown that USG could accurately measure gingival height and crestal bone level, and classify furcation involvement. Due to physical constraints, USG may be more applicable to the buccal surfaces of the dentition even with an intra-oral probe. Clinical studies have also shown that MRI could visualize the degree of soft-tissue inflammation and osseous edema, the extent of bone loss at furcation involvement sites, and periodontal bone level. However, there was a lack of clinical studies on the evaluation of peri-implant tissues by MRI. Moreover, an MRI machine is very expensive, occupies much space, and requires more time than cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) or intraoral radiographs to complete a scan. The feasibility of OCT to evaluate periodontal and peri-implant tissues remains to be elucidated, as there are only preclinical studies at the moment. A major shortcoming of OCT is that it may not reach the bottom of the periodontal pocket, particularly for inflammatory conditions, due to the absorption of near-infrared light by hemoglobin. Until future technological breakthroughs finally overcome the limitations of USG, MRI and OCT, the practical imaging modalities for routine diagnostics of periodontal and peri-implant tissues remain to be plain radiographs and CBCTs.

Soft tissue elasticity at teeth and implant sites. A novel outcome measure of the soft tissue phenotype.

AIM: To assess ultrasonographic tissue elasticity at teeth and implant sites and its variation after peri-implant soft tissue augmentation with a connective tissue graft (CTG). METHODS: Twenty-eight patients, each contributing with one clinically healthy dental implant exhibiting a soft tissue dehiscence (PSTD), were included. Implant sites were augmented with CTG and monitored over 12 months. Ultrasonographic strain elastography, expressed as strain ratios (SR1, SR2, and SR3, respectively) was assessed at baseline, 6-, and 12-month, and compared with the corresponding contralateral homologous natural tooth. SR1 assessed the strain/elasticity of the midfacial coronal portion of the soft tissue in comparison to the natural tooth crown/implant-supported crown, SR2 evaluated the strain of the midfacial coronal soft tissue in relation to the one of the alveolar mucosa, while SR3 depicted the strain of the midfacial soft tissue in relation to the interproximal soft tissue on the transverse ultrasound scan. RESULTS: SR1 in natural dentition and at implant sites was 0.20 ± 0.08 and 0.30 ± 0.14, respectively (p = .002), indicating that the coronal portion of the soft tissue around teeth is generally more elastic than its counterpart around dental implants. Soft tissue augmentation with CTG promoted an increased stiffness of the midfacial coronal portion of the soft tissue over 12 months (p < .001 for SR1, SR2, and SR3). Strain ratios at the 12-month time points were significantly higher than the values observed at 6 months (p < .001). Regression analysis demonstrated that strain elastography ratios in natural dentition were significantly associated with keratinized gingiva width, and gingival thickness. At implant sites, SR1 was significantly associated with keratinized mucosa width and mucosal thickness (p < .001 for both correlations), SR2 was significantly associated with keratinized mucosa width (p = .013), and SR3 was significantly associated with the surgical technique performed in combination with CTG (p = .022). CONCLUSION: Ultrasound strain elastography captures and quantifies tissue elasticity and its changes after soft tissue augmentation. A different baseline tissue elasticity was observed between teeth and dental implants in the most coronal aspect of the soft tissue. The main factors affecting tissue elasticity-related outcomes were the keratinized tissue width, and mucosal thickness.

Disease recurrence during supportive therapy following peri-implantitis treatment: A retrospective study.

AIM: Supportive therapy is key to prevent disease recurrence after peri-implantitis treatment. The primary objective was to quantify disease recurrence during supportive peri-implant therapy (SPIT) after peri-implantitis treatment. A secondary objective was to assess the success/failure of cumulative interceptive supportive therapy (CIST) after peri-implantitis treatment. METHODS: Compliers (whether regular or erratic) with SPIT after peri-implantitis treatment during ≥12 months were retrospectively evaluated. CIST was prescribed whenever residual pockets ≥6 mm concomitant with profuse bleeding on probing (disease recurrence) were identified. Patient- and implant-related factors were analyzed to explore their associations with disease recurrence and the need for CIST. RESULTS: Disease recurrence was considered in 28 patients (40 implants). Of these, 14 patients (23 implants) further demonstrated radiographic evidence of progressive bone loss (≥1 mm). This represented an overall disease recurrence following peri-implantitis treatment of ~20% and ~ 10% at patient and implant levels, respectively. Smokers, patients diagnosed at baseline with periodontitis grade C, and males were significantly more prone to exhibit recurrence. Patients undergoing CIST due to instability were not likely to respond favorably (~70% continued to exhibit residual pockets). CONCLUSION: Disease recurrence during SPIT following peri-implantitis treatment on selected cases is ~20%. Patients undergoing CIST due to instability are not likely to respond favorably.

Randomized controlled multi-centre study comparing shorter dental implants (6 mm) to longer dental implants (11-15 mm) in combination with sinus floor elevation procedures: 10-year data.

AIM: To compare implant survival and complication rates between shorter and standard-length implants with sinus augmentation and restored with single crowns, at 10 years of loading. MATERIALS AND METHODS: One-hundred and one patients (137 implants) with a ridge height of 5-7 mm in the posterior maxilla were randomly assigned to two treatment modalities: shorter implants (6 mm) (group short [GS]) or standard-length implants (11-15 mm) with sinus grafting (group graft [GG]). Following the insertion of final restorations, patients were regularly recalled for up to 10 years. Assessed outcomes encompassed implant survival, marginal bone levels (MBLs), biological and technical parameters and patient-reported outcome measures (OHIP-49 = Oral Health Impact Profile). Non-parametric statistical analysis was used to analyse the data. RESULTS: For the 5- to 10-year follow-up period, 77 patients with 105 implants (GS: 36 patients/48 implants; GG: 41/57) were available for re-examination (drop-out rate 21%). Implant survival rates at the patient level were 96.0% (GS; 2 failures) and 100% (GG) (inter-group p = .24). Median MBLs amounted to 0.00 mm (min 0.00; max 3.25; GS) and 0.00 mm (min 0.00; max 4.55; GG) (inter-group p = .73). Technical complications predominantly occurred within the first 5 years (inter-group p > .05). Peri-implantitis rates were 4.2% (GS) and 13.3% (GG) (intergroup p = .37). Median OHIP-49 scores were 7.00 (0.00; 39.00; GS) and 9.00 (0.00; 196; GG) (inter-group p = .61) at 10 years. CONCLUSIONS: Based on similar 10-year implant survival rates, reduced patient morbidity and lower costs, the use of shorter dental implants might well serve as an alternative treatment concept to longer implants placed in conjunction with sinus grafting for patients with a limited ridge height in the posterior maxilla. Study register: https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT01030523.

CCR2 is a potential therapeutic target in peri-implantitis.

AIM: CCR2 (C-C chemokine receptor type 2) plays a crucial role in inflammatory and bone metabolic diseases; however, its role in peri-implantitis remains unclear. This study aimed to explore whether CCR2 contributes to peri-implantitis and the treatment effects of cenicriviroc (CVC) on peri-implant inflammation and bone resorption. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The expression of CCR2 was studied using clinical tissue analysis and an in vivo peri-implantitis model. The role of CCR2 in promoting inflammation and bone resorption in peri-implantitis was evaluated in Ccr2-/- mice and wild-type mice. The effect of CVC on peri-implantitis was evaluated using systemic and local dosage forms. RESULTS: Human peri-implantitis tissues showed increased CCR2 and CCL2 levels, which were positively correlated with bone loss around the implants. Knocking out Ccr2 in an experimental model of peri-implantitis resulted in decreased monocyte and macrophage infiltration, reduced pro-inflammatory cytokine generation and impaired osteoclast activity, leading to reduced inflammation and bone loss around the implants. Treatment with CVC ameliorated bone loss in experimental peri-implantitis. CONCLUSIONS: CCR2 may be a potential target for peri-implantitis treatment by harnessing the immune-inflammatory response to modulate the local inflammation and osteoclast activity.

A Randomized Controlled Trial on the Timing of Soft-Tissue Augmentation in Immediate Implant Placement: Hard-Tissue Changes and Clinical Outcome.

AIM: To assess the impact of the timing of soft-tissue augmentation (STA) on mean buccal bone changes following immediate implant placement (IPP) in the anterior maxilla. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Patients with a failing tooth and intact buccal bone wall in the anterior maxilla (15-25) were enrolled in this randomized controlled trial. Following single IIP and socket grafting, they were randomly allocated to the control group (immediate STA performed during the same surgical procedure) or the test group (delayed STA performed 3 months later). Implants were placed with a surgical guide and immediately restored with an implant-supported provisional crown. Changes in bone dimensions were assessed using superimposed CBCT images taken prior to surgery and at 1-year follow-up. Clinical outcomes were registered at 1-year follow-up. RESULTS: Twenty patients were randomized to each group (control: 16 females, 4 males, mean age 57.6; test: 9 females, 11 males, mean age 54.2). Ten patients in the control group and 13 patients in the test group had a thick bone wall phenotype. Estimated marginal mean horizontal buccal bone loss at 1 mm below the implant shoulder was -0.553 and -0.898 mm for the control and test group, respectively. The estimated mean difference of 0.344 mm in favour of the control group was not significant (95% CI: -0.415 to 1.104; p = 0.363). Also at all other horizontal and vertical levels, no significant differences could be observed between the groups. The combination of socket grafting and STA enabled counteraction of any buccal soft-tissue loss (≥ 0 mm) at 1 mm below the implant shoulder in 82% of the patients in the control group and in 75% of the patients in the test group (p = 1.000). The clinical outcome was favourable in both groups, yet implants in the control group demonstrated slightly less marginal bone loss (median difference 0.20 mm; 95% CI: 0.00-0.44; p = 0.028). CONCLUSION: In patients with an intact and mainly thick buccal bone wall in the anterior maxilla, the timing of STA following IIP had no significant impact on mean buccal bone loss. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT05537545.

A multi-centre randomized controlled trial comparing connective tissue graft with collagen matrix to increase soft tissue thickness at the buccal aspect of single implants: 3-Year results.

AIM: To compare connective tissue graft (CTG) with collagen matrix (CMX) in terms of increase in buccal soft tissue profile (BSP) when applied at single implant sites. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Patients with a single tooth gap in the anterior maxilla and horizontal mucosa defect were enrolled in a multi-centre randomized controlled trial. All were fully healed sites with a bucco-palatal bone dimension of at least 6 mm, and received an immediately restored single implant using a full digital workflow. Patients were randomly allocated to the control (CTG) or test group (CMX: Geistlich Fibro-Gide, Geistlich Pharma AG, Wolhusen, Switzerland) to increase buccal soft tissue thickness. Primary endpoints were increase in BSP at T1 (immediately postop), T2 (3 months), T3 (1 year) and T4 (3 years) based on superimposed digital surface models. Secondary endpoints included patient-reported, clinical and aesthetic outcomes. RESULTS: Thirty patients were included per group (control group: 15 males, 15 females, mean age 50.1 years; test group: 14 males, 16 females, mean age 48.2 years) and 50 could be re-examined at T4. The changes in BSP over time were significantly different between the groups (p < .001). At T4, the estimated mean increase in BSP amounted to 0.83 mm (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.58-1.08) in the control group and 0.48 mm (95% CI: 0.22-0.73) in the test group. The estimated mean difference of 0.35 mm (95% CI: 0.06-0.65) in favour of the control group was significant (p = .021). No significant differences between the groups could be observed in terms of patients' aesthetic satisfaction (p = .563), probing depth (p = .286), plaque (p = .676), bleeding on probing (p = .732), midfacial recession (p = .667), Pink Esthetic Score (p = .366) and Mucosal Scarring Index (p = .438). However, CMX resulted in significantly more marginal bone loss (-0.43 mm; 95% CI: -0.77 to -0.09; p = .015) than CTG. CONCLUSIONS: CTG was more effective in increasing buccal soft tissue profile and resulted in less marginal bone loss than CMX. Therefore, CTG remains the gold standard to increase soft tissue thickness at implant sites. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: This study was registered in ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT04210596).

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.

Patient-reported outcomes following dental implant rehabilitation according to reason for missing teeth: A survey from a Norwegian population 8 years following treatment.

AIM: The aim of this study was to assess patient-reported outcomes (PROs) 8 years after dental implant rehabilitation in a sample with tooth loss due to periodontitis (TLP) and a sample with missing teeth for other reasons (MTOR). MATERIALS AND METHODS: The Norwegian National Insurance Scheme registry of subsidized dental implant therapy was searched, and patients (n = 3083) rehabilitated with dental implants in 2014 were mailed a questionnaire. PROs were described by relative frequencies, and the TLP and MTOR subsamples were compared using chi-square test. Multiple linear regression analyses were used to investigate variables potentially predicting PROs. RESULTS: Of the respondents (n = 1299), more than 90% were partly or fully satisfied with the treatment outcome. Complications were reported by 44.2%. Patients who lost teeth due to periodontitis (n = 784) reported greater oral function improvement and better pre-treatment information, and were more likely to experience complications when compared with patients who lost teeth for other reasons (n = 515). Age, level of education, self-funded cost, pre-treatment information, history of complications and the reason for missing teeth were found to predict PROs. CONCLUSIONS: In a Norwegian population rehabilitated with dental implants in 2014, satisfaction with the treatment outcome and the aesthetic outcome was high, irrespective of the reason for missing teeth. Self-report of complications and lack of pre-treatment information were the strongest predictors of inferior patient satisfaction and also predicted inferior oral function.

Clinical outcomes and risk factor analysis of dental implants inserted with lateral maxillary sinus floor augmentation: A 3- to 8-year retrospective study.

AIM: To evaluate the 3- to 8-year outcomes of dental implants placed with lateral sinus floor augmentation (LSFA) and to identify factors affecting implant survival. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This retrospective study was performed by screening all implants placed with LSFA procedures, which were conducted between January 2012 and December 2016. Subantral bone gain (SABG) and apical bone height (ABH) were assessed using panoramic radiographs. The cumulative survival rate of implants was analysed using life-table analysis and Kaplan-Meier survival curves. The influential risk factors affecting survival were assessed using univariate log-rank tests and multivariable mixture cure rate model. Implant complications were recorded. RESULTS: Based on the established criteria, a total of 449 patients (760 implants) were included in this study. In the 3- to 8-year follow-up (mean ± SD, 5.81 ± 1.33 years), 15 implants in 14 patients failed, with a CRS of 96.81% on an implant basis and 95.07% on a patient basis. A history of periodontitis and poor compliance with supportive periodontal treatment was associated with a significantly higher risk of implant failure at both implant and patient levels. Significant decreases in ABH occurred during each yearly interval except for 3 years. A similar trend has been observed for SABG at 1, 2, 6 and 8 years. The total complication rate was 31.84% on implant basis, with peri-implant mucositis (21.58%) being the most frequent biologic complication and porcelain cracking (5.00%) being the most common technical complication. CONCLUSIONS: Implant with LSFA is a reliable treatment option in atrophic maxilla. A history of periodontitis without regular supportive periodontal treatment was identified as a predictor for implant failure. Slight but significant shrinkage of vertically augmented bone can be observed after implant placement.

Dental implant treatment in patients with cancer on high-dose antiresorptive medication: A prospective feasibility study with 2 years follow-up.

OBJECTIVES: Dental implant treatment is considered contraindicated in patients with cancer on high-dose antiresorptive medication (HDAR). The aim of this prospective, feasibility study was to evaluate implant treatment in patients with cancer on HDAR, in terms of implant survival, implant success, and oral health-related quality of life (OHLQoL) after 2 years of loading. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Implants were inserted in three groups of HDAR patients: (1) Previous tooth extraction, no medication-related osteonecrosis of the jaw (MRONJ), (2) Previous MRONJ, now healed, (3) Existing MRONJ, planned surgical resection. Implants were placed without adjunctive bone or soft tissue argumentation. Abutment operation was performed after ≥12 weeks. Prosthetic treatment was initiated ≥14 weeks. Survival and success rate were determined, and OHLQoL was analyzed with OHIP-49 and QLQ-H&N35 questionnaires. Patients were seen for 6 months, 1- and 2 years follow-up. RESULTS: Twenty-two patients, 39 implants, completed the implant-based prosthetic treatment. Implant-supported crowns and overdentures were fabricated. Thirteen patients (59%) with 23 implants (59%) completed 2 years follow-up. Overall implant survival and success rate after 2 years of loading were 100% and 97.4%, respectively. OHLQoL for the patients increased in all groups after the treatment, a substantial increase was seen in group 3. Two patients developed MRONJ, but not related to the implant treatment. CONCLUSION: Dental implant treatment, with high survival and success rate and increased post-treatment OHLQoL, is feasible in HDAR patients after 2 years of loading. Caution with general recommendations should be exercised.

Jawbone measurements of edentulous sites related to implant planning using magnetic resonance imaging compared to cone beam computed tomography: An ex vivo study.

AIM: To compare measurements on images obtained by magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and cone beam CT (CBCT) for height, width, and area in alveolar bone sites in human jaw specimens. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Forty edentulous alveolar posterior sites in human cadaver specimens were imaged using CBCT scanners, and with zero-echo-time MRI (ZTE-MRI). Semi-automatic volume registration was performed to generate representative coronal sections of the sites related to implant planning. ZTE-MRI sections were also presented after grayscale inversion (INV MRI). Three observers measured bone height, bone width 5 mm from the alveolar crest, and bone area stretching from the width measurement to the top of the alveolar crest in the images. Interobserver agreement was assessed by intra-class correlation coefficients (ICC). The measurements were analyzed using two-way repeated measures ANOVA factoring observer and image type. RESULTS: ICC was >0.95 for bone height, width, and bone area. No significant differences among observers (p = 0.14) or image type (p = 0.60) were found for bone height. For bone width, observer (p = 0.14) was not a significant factor, while ZTE-MRI produced width estimates that were significantly different and systematically smaller than CBCT-based estimates (p ≤ 0.001). Observer (p = 0.06) was not a significant factor regarding the bone area measurements, contrary to the imaging type where ZTE-MRI led to significantly smaller area estimates than CBCT (p ≤ 0.001). CONCLUSION: Bone height measurements were essentially equivalent using CBCT and MRI. This was found regardless of grayscale choice for the MRI. However, ZTE-MRI resulted in smaller estimates of bone width and area.

Immediate versus early implant placement for single tooth replacement in the aesthetic area: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVES: To compare immediate implant placement (IIP) with early implant placement (EIP) for single tooth replacement in the aesthetic area in terms of aesthetic, clinical, and patient-reported outcomes. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Two independent reviewers conducted an electronic literature search in PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, and Cochrane databases as well as a manual search to identify eligible clinical studies up to February 2023. Randomized Controlled Trials (RCTs) comparing IIP with EIP were included for a qualitative and quantitative analysis. The primary outcome was vertical midfacial soft tissue change. Secondary outcomes were horizontal midfacial soft tissue change, vertical papillary change, pink esthetic score (PES), implant survival, buccal bone thickness, marginal bone level change, patient discomfort, chair time, and patient satisfaction. RESULTS: Out of 1185 records, 6 RCTs were selected, reporting on 222 patients who received 222 single implants (IIP: 112 implants in 112 patients; EIP: 110 implants in 110 patients) in the anterior maxilla or mandible. Patients had a mean age ranging from 35.6 to 52.6 years and were followed between 8 and 24 months. Two RCTs showed some concerns, and four showed a high risk of bias. Four studies could be included in a meta-analysis on the primary outcome and three only considered cases with an intact buccal bone wall. Meta-analysis failed to demonstrate a significant difference in terms of vertical midfacial soft tissue change between IIP and EIP (mean difference: 0.31 mm, 95% CI [-0.23; 0.86], p = .260; I2 = 83%, p < .001). No significant differences were found for PES (standardized mean difference: 0.92, 95% CI [-0.23; 2.07], p = .120; I2 = 89%, p < .001), implant survival (RR: 0.98, 95% CI [0.93, 1.03], p = .480; I2 = 0%, p = .980), and marginal bone level change (mean difference: 0.03 mm, 95% CI [-0.12, 0.17], p = .700; I2 = 0%, p = .470). Insufficient data were available for meta-analyses of other secondary outcomes. CONCLUSION: In low-risk patients with an intact buccal bone wall, there seems to be no difference between IIP and EIP in terms of aesthetic and clinical outcomes. The strength of this conclusion is rated as low since studies showed an unclear or high risk of bias. In addition, state-of-the-art therapy was only delivered in a minority of studies. Future RCTs should also provide data on patient-reported outcomes since these have been underreported.

Efficacy of a novel three-step decontamination protocol for titanium-based dental implants: An in vitro and in vivo study.

AIM: The aim of the study was to evaluate several mechanical and chemical decontamination methods associated with a newly introduced biofilm matrix disruption strategy for biofilm cleaning and preservation of implant surface features. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Titanium (Ti) discs were obtained by additive manufacturing. Polymicrobial biofilm-covered Ti disc surfaces were decontaminated with mechanical [Ti curette, Teflon curette, Ti brush, water-air jet device, and Er:YAG laser] or chemical [iodopovidone (PVPI) 0.2% to disrupt the extracellular matrix, along with amoxicillin; minocycline; tetracycline; H2 O2 3%; chlorhexidine 0.2%; NaOCl 0.95%; hydrocarbon-oxo-borate-based antiseptic] protocols. The optimal in vitro mechanical/chemical protocol was then tested in combination using an in vivo biofilm model with intra-oral devices. RESULTS: Er:YAG laser treatment displayed optimum surface cleaning by biofilm removal with minimal deleterious damage to the surface, smaller Ti release, good corrosion stability, and improved fibroblast readhesion. NaOCl 0.95% was the most promising agent to reduce in vitro and in vivo biofilms and was even more effective when associated with PVPI 0.2% as a pre-treatment to disrupt the biofilm matrix. The combination of Er:YAG laser followed by PVPI 0.2% plus NaOCl 0.95% promoted efficient decontamination of rough Ti surfaces by disrupting the biofilm matrix and killing remnants of in vivo biofilms formed in the mouth (the only protocol to lead to ~99% biofilm eradication). CONCLUSION: Er:YAG laser + PVPI 0.2% + NaOCl 0.95% can be a reliable decontamination protocol for Ti surfaces, eliminating microbial biofilms without damaging the implant surface.

Clinical outcomes of implant- versus abutment-level connection in screw-retained fixed dental prostheses: A 5-year randomized controlled trial.

AIM: The aim of the study was to evaluate the 5 years clinical outcomes associated with implant-level connection (IL) versus abutment-level connection (AL) for implants with an internal conical connection (ICC) supporting a screw-retained fixed partial denture. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Fifty patients with 119 implants were randomly allocated to either the AL or IL group. Radiographic (Marginal bone loss) and clinical outcomes (Bleeding on Probing, probing pocket depth, plaque accumulation, incidence of peri-implantitis and peri-implant mucositis as well as prosthetic complications) were collected and compared at 1, 2, 3, and 5 years. A linear mixed model was used to evaluate the differences between groups. RESULTS: Five years after treatment, the MBL change was not significantly different between the groups at any point. The MBL was 0.23 ± 0.64 mm (AL) and 0.23 ± 0.29 mm (IL). The bleeding on Probing was 44% (AL) and 45% (IL) (p = .89). The mean probing depth was 2.91 ± 1.01 mm (AL) and 3.51 ± 0.67 mm (IL). This difference between the groups was statistically significant but clinical insignificant. Presence of plaque was slightly higher (p = .06) in the IL group (34.4%) compared with the AL group (26.3%). The overall technical, biological, and prosthetic complication rates were similar between groups. None of the implants developed peri-implantitis during the entire follow-up period. CONCLUSION: The results of this clinical trial indicated that all clinical and radiographical parameters were clinically comparable between the study groups.

Performance of a new implant system and drilling protocol-A minipig intraoral dental implant model study.

AIM: A new implant system encompassing implants with a tri-oval cross-sectional design and a simplified site preparation protocol at low speed and no irrigation has been developed. The objective of this study was to assess the safety and efficacy of the new implant system using the minipig intraoral dental implant model. METHODS: Eight Yucatan minipigs were included. Twelve weeks after extractions, four implants per animal were randomly placed and allowed to heal transmucosal for 13 weeks: two Ø3.5 × 10 mm implants with a back-tapered collar and circular cross-section (control) and two Ø3.5 × 11 mm implants with tri-oval collar and cross-section (test). MicroCT and histological analysis was performed. RESULTS: Thirty-two implants were placed; one implant for the control group was lost. Histologically, BIC was higher in the test compared with the control group (74.1% vs. 60.9%, p < .001). At the platform level, inflammation was statistically significantly higher albeit mild in the test compared with the control group. No other significant differences were observed between groups. MicroCT analysis showed that bone-to-implant-contact (BIC) and trabecular thickness were statistically significantly higher for the test than the control group. Test group had significantly higher first BIC distance than controls on lingual sites. CONCLUSIONS: The present study results support the safety and efficacy of the new dental implant system and simplified site preparation protocol; human studies should be carried out to confirm these findings.

A cross-sectional CBCT assessment of the relative position of one-piece titanium-zirconium mini-implants placed for mandibular overdentures using non-guided surgery.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the relative position of mini-implants to retain a mandibular overdenture, according to the surgical protocol, technical and anatomical factors. METHODS: Mandibular cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) scans were analyzed for 73 patients who received four one-piece titanium-zirconium mini-implants. Drilling was performed using a 1.6 mm needle drill and a 2.2 mm Pilot Drill, according to the bone density with a surgical stent. Post-insertion CBCT images in DICOM format were analyzed using the E-Vol-DX software with BAR filters. Divergence angle between implants and between implants and the overdenture path of insertion was measured using CliniView 10.2.6 software. RESULTS: Divergence between implants ranged from 0° to 22.3° (mean = 4.2; SD = 3.7) in the lateral and from 0° to 26.2° (mean = 5.3; SD = 4.1) in the frontal projections (p < .001). Only 1 (0.2%) and 3 (0.7%) of the measurements were higher than 20° in the lateral and frontal views, respectively. The mean angulations between the implant and the path of insertion for the overdenture were 9.3° (SD = 7.5) and 4.0° (SD = 2.9) for the lateral and frontal views, respectively (p < .001). Regression analyses showed a significant association between the divergence of implants and the frontal view projection (p < .001), greater distance between the paired implants (p = .017), the flapped surgical protocol (p = .002), higher final insertion torque (p = .011), and deeper preparation with the needle drill (p < .001). CONCLUSIONS: The mini-implants were placed with low divergence angles and satisfactory parallelism. Factors including shorter distances between the implants, higher density bone, and a flapless surgical approach all contributed positively to improved parallelism of the mini-implants.

Comparison of Different Intraoral Scanners With Prefabricated Aid on Accuracy and Framework Passive Fit of Digital Complete-Arch Implant Impression: An In Vitro Study.

OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to compare the accuracy of digital complete-arch implant impressions with prefabricated aids using three intraoral scanners (IOSs) and explore the correlation between virtual deviation measurement and physical framework misfit. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Four edentulous maxillary master models with four and six parallel and angular implants were fabricated and scanned by a laboratory scanner as reference scans. Ten scans of each master model were acquired using three IOSs (IOS-T, IOS-M, and IOS-A) with and without prefabricated aids. Trueness and precision of root mean square (RMS) errors were measured. Ten aluminum alloy frameworks were fabricated, and the misfit was measured with a micro-computed tomography scan with one screw tightened. RESULTS: Trueness and precision showed significant improvement when prefabricated aids were used for all three IOSs (p < 0.010). Median (interquartile range) RMS errors of trueness reduced from 67.5 (30.4) to 61.8 (30.3) µm, from 100.6 (35.4) to 45.9 (15.1) µm, and from 52.7 (33.2) to 41.1 (22.5) µm for scanner IOS-T, IOS-M, and IOS-A, respectively (p < 0.010). The precision of IOS-A and IOS-M was significantly better than IOS-T when using prefabricated aid (p < 0.001). RMS errors and the maximum marginal misfit of the framework were significantly correlated (p < 0.001, R2 = 0.845). CONCLUSIONS: With the prefabricated aids, the accuracy of IOSs enhanced significantly in digital complete-arch implant impressions. Three IOSs showed different levels of improvement in accuracy. Virtual RMS errors <62.2 µm could be the clinically acceptable threshold (150 µm) for framework passive fit.

Guided bone regeneration for peri-implant augmentation: A retrospective study comparing two surgical techniques with a mean follow-up of 26 months.

OBJECTIVES: To introduce a modified guided bone regeneration (GBR) technique using intact periosteum and deproteinized bovine bone mineral (DBBM) for peri-implant augmentation and compare the clinical outcomes with those of conventional GBR. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Patients who received peri-implant augmentation in posterior sites between 2015 and 2021 were reviewed in this study. Group A was treated with a modified GBR technique, and Group B was treated with conventional GBR. For group comparison, propensity score matching was performed with a sensitivity analysis. The implant survival rate, dimensional changes in hard tissue, marginal bone loss (MBL), and peri-implant parameters were evaluated. RESULTS: In total, 114 implants from 98 patients were included. The implant survival rates were 95.74% in Group A and 95.00% in Group B during the follow-up period. At 6 months, the median horizontal thickness was recorded at 0.87 mm (IQ1-IQ3 = 0.00-1.75 mm) in Group A, exhibiting a relatively lower value compared to the corresponding measurement of 0.98 mm (IQ1-IQ3 = 0.00-1.89 mm) in Group B (p = .937). Vertical height displayed no statistically significant intergroup difference between the two groups (p = .758). The mean follow-up period was 25.83 ± 12.93 months after loading in Group A and 27.47 ± 21.29 months in Group B (p = .761). MBL and peri-implant parameters were comparable between the two groups. CONCLUSIONS: Within the limitations of this study, the modified GBR technique using intact periosteum and DBBM grafting might be a viable alternative to correct bone defects around implants in molar and premolar sites.