RESUMEN
AIM: To investigate the efficacy of alveolar ridge preservation (ARP) in periodontally compromised molar extraction sites. METHODS: An electronic search was performed on 10th November 2023 across five databases, seeking randomised/non-randomised controlled trials (RCTs/NCTs) that included a minimum follow-up duration of four months. The RoB2 and Robins-I tools assessed the risk of bias for the included studies. Data on alveolar ridge dimensional and volumetric changes, keratinized mucosal width, and need for additional bone augmentation for implant placement were collected. Subsequently, a meta-analysis was carried out to derive the pooled estimates. RESULTS: Six studies were incorporated in the present review, and a total of 135 molar extraction sockets in 130 subjects were included in the meta-analysis. ARP was undertaken in 68 sites, and 67 sites healed spontaneously. The follow-up time ranged from 4 to 6 months. The meta-analysis of both RCTs and NCTs showed significant differences in mid-buccal ridge width changes at 1 mm level below ridge crest with a mean difference (MD) of 3.80 (95% CI: 1.67-5.94), mid-buccal ridge height changes (MD: 2.18; 95% CI: 1.25-3.12) and volumetric changes (MD: 263.59; 95% CI: 138.44-388.74) in favour of ARP, while the certainty of evidence is graded low to very low. Moreover, ARP appeared to reduce the need for additional sinus and bone augmentation procedures at implant placement with low certainty of evidence. CONCLUSIONS: Within the limitations of this study, alveolar ridge preservation in periodontally compromised extraction sites may, to some extent, preserve the ridge vertically and horizontally with reference to spontaneous healing. However, it could not eliminate the need for additional augmentation for implant placement. Further, longitudinal studies with large sample sizes and refined protocols are needed.
RESUMEN
Orthodontic treatment of periodontally compromised patients presents unique challenges, including controlling periodontal inflammation, applying appropriate force, designing an effective dental anchorage, and maintaining treatment results. Deteriorated periodontal support leads to alterations in the biological responses of teeth to mechanical forces, and thus orthodontists must take greater care when treating patients with periodontal conditions than when treating those with a good periodontal status. In this article, we report the case of a 59-year-old woman with stabilised Stage IV grade C generalised periodontitis characterised by pathological tooth migration (PTM). The assessment, planning, and treatment of this patient with orthodontic fixed appliances is described. Moreover, the anchorage planning and biomechanical considerations are detailed. Specific orthodontic appliances were employed in this case to produce force systems for achieving precise tooth movement, which included a cantilever, mini-screws, and a box loop. Careful application of those appliances resulted in satisfactory aesthetic and functional orthodontic outcomes in the patient. This case highlights the importance of multidisciplinary collaboration in the treatment of patients with severe periodontitis and the potential for tailored biomechanical approaches in orthodontic treatment to furnish good outcomes.