Antibody Response Following a Two-Dose mRNA Vaccination Regimen, in Health Care Workers of a Tertiary Hospital in Athens, Greece.

We analyzed the antibody responses of 564 hospital workers in Athens, Greece, after vaccination with two doses of the BNT162b2 (Comirnaty®; BioNTech and Pfizer) mRNA COVID-19 vaccine. A greater antibody increase was observed in women, younger age groups, previously infected individuals and personnel working in COVID-19 clinics. Notably, individuals with a prior COVID-19 infection mounted a significantly higher antibody titer following the first dose than the rest of the population; the same was true for those working in COVID-19 clinics, even without history of previous infection.

Coverage of Miller class I and II recession defects using enamel matrix proteins versus coronally advanced flap technique: a 2-year report.

BACKGROUND: The aim of this study was to evaluate a comparison of the coronally advanced flap procedure with or without the use of enamel matrix proteins in the treatment of recession defects. METHODS: This 2-year study was conducted as a blinded, split-mouth, placebo-controlled, and randomized design. Thirty patients from two dental schools with two paired buccal recession defects were chosen. Surgical recession coverage was performed as the coronally advanced flap technique. One site was additionally treated with derivative (EMD) and the other site with a placebo (propylene glycol alginate [PGA]). A blinded examiner assessed pre- and post-surgical measurements. Measurements comprised the height and width of the gingival recession, height of keratinized tissue, probing attachment level, probing depth, and alveolar bone level. RESULTS: Twenty-four months after therapy, both treatment modalities showed significant root coverage and probing attachment gain. The mean gingival recession decreased from 3.6 to 0.8 mm for the EMD-treated sites and from 3.8 to 1.4 mm for the control sites. However, this difference was not statistically significant (P = 0.122). Similarly, all other clinical parameters did not differ significantly in the between-group comparison except for the recession width (P = 0.027) and probing depth (P = 0.046) exhibiting higher reductions in the EMD group. Complete root coverage could be maintained over 2 years in 53% of the EMD versus merely 23% in the control group. A total of 47% of the treated recessions in the control group deteriorated again in the second year after therapy compared to 22% in the EMD group. CONCLUSION: Enamel matrix derivative seems to provide better long-term results.

Comparative study of Emdogain and coronally advanced flap technique in the treatment of human gingival recessions. A prospective controlled clinical study.

OBJECTIVES: Various surgical techniques have been proposed for coverage of denuded root surfaces. The aim of this study was to evaluate a comparison of coronally repositioned flap procedure with or without the use of enamel matrix proteins in the treatment of recession defects. MATERIAL AND METHODS: This study was an intra-individual longitudinal test of 12 months duration conducted as a blinded, split-mouth, placebo-controlled and randomised design. It was performed in 2 dental schools. 36 patients, aged 22-62 years, with 2 paired buccal recession defects of at least 3 mm participated. Surgical recession coverage was performed as coronally-advanced flap technique at both sites in the same session. One site was additionally treated with commercially-available enamel matrix proteins (Emdogain) and the other site with placebo (propylene glycol alginate) in accordance with the randomisation list. A blinded examiner assessed pre- and post-surgical measurements. Clinical measurements and photographs were taken pre-surgically and after 1 week, 3 weeks, 3 months, 6 months and 12 months, postoperatively. Measurements comprised height and width of the gingival recession, height of keratinized tissue, probing attachment level, probing pocket depth and alveolar bone level by periodontal probe, Florida Probe or caliper to the nearest 0.5 mm. RESULTS: 12 months after therapy, both treatment modalities showed significant root coverage and probing attachment gain. Gingival recession decreased from 3.7 mm to 0.8 mm for the Emdogain treated sites and from 3.9 mm to 1.0 mm for the control sites, corresponding to mean root coverages of 80% and 79%, respectively. This difference was not significant. With the exception of keratinized tissue gain, which was significantly higher (p=0.003) in the Emdogain group, all other clinical variables were not different in the between-group comparison. CONCLUSIONS: As the additional use of Emdogain together with coronally advanced flap technique for recession coverage showed no difference in the overall clinical outcome, there is no clear benefit to combine Emdogain with this surgical technique.