Aerosol transmission for SARS-CoV-2 in the dental practice. A review by SIdP Covid-19 task-force.

Current evidence suggests that SARS-CoV-2, the virus that causes COVID-19, is predominantly spread from person to person. Aim of this narrative review is to explore transmission modality of SARS-CoV-2 to provide appropriate advice to stakeholders, in order to support the implementation of effective public health measures and protect healthcare workers that primary face the disease. "In vivo" and "in vitro" studies from laboratories and hospitals confirmed the presence of surface contamination and provided insight of SARS-CoV-2 detection in the air, particularly in indoor settings with poor ventilation where aerosol-generating procedures were performed. Measures for aerosol reduction, in conjunction with other effective infection control strategies, are needed to prevent the spread of SARS-CoV-2 in dental setting.

Surface disinfection and protective masks for SARS-CoV-2 and other respiratory viruses: A review by SIdP COVID-19 task force.

OBJECTIVES: Primary focused question for this systematic review (SR) was "Which is the evidence about surfaces decontamination and protection masks for SARS-Cov-2 in dental practice?" Secondary question was "Which is the evidence about surfaces decontamination and protection masks against airborne pathogens and directly transmitted viral pathogens causing respiratory infections?" MATERIALS AND METHODS: PRISMA guidelines were used. Studies on surface decontamination and protective masks for SARS-CoV-2 in dental practice were considered. Studies on other respiratory viruses were considered for the secondary question. RESULTS: No studies are available for SARS-CoV-2. Four studies on surface disinfection against respiratory viruses were included. Ethanol 70% and sodium hypochlorite 0,5% seem to be effective in reducing infectivity by > 3log TCID. Four RCTs compared different types of masks on HCW. The single studies reported no difference for laboratory-diagnosed influenza, laboratory-diagnosed respiratory infection, and influenza-like illness. A meta-analysis was not considered appropriate. CONCLUSIONS: There is lack of evidence on the efficacy of surface disinfection and protective masks to reduce the spread of SARS-CoV-2 or other respiratory viruses in dentistry. However, the consistent use of respirator and routine surface disinfection is strongly suggested. There is urgent need of data on the efficacy of specific protection protocols for dental HCW against viral infections.

Short-term comparison of two non-surgical treatment modalities of peri-implantitis: Clinical and microbiological outcomes in a two-factorial randomized controlled trial.

AIM: To compare the efficacy of two different therapies (amino acid glycine abrasive powder and a desiccant material) and their combination in the non-surgical treatment of peri-implantitis. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This was an examiner-blind randomized clinical trial, with 2-factorial design with a follow-up of 6 months. The combination of the two factors resulted in four interventions: (a) non-surgical debridement alone (C); (b) non-surgical debridement and a desiccant material (H); (c) non-surgical debridement and glycine powder (G); and (d) non-surgical debridement, desiccant material and glycine powder (HG). RESULTS: Sixty-four patients with peri-implantitis were randomized, 16 for each intervention. After six months, two implants failed in the G intervention. Mean pocket depth reduction was higher in patients treated with the desiccant material (estimated difference: 0.5 mm; 95% CI from 0.1 to 0.9 mm, p = .0229) while there was no difference in the patients treated with glycine powder (estimated difference: 0.1 mm; 95% CI from -0.3 to 0.5 mm, p = .7333). VAS for pain during intervention and VAS for pain after one week were higher for patients treated with glycine powder (p = .0056 and p = .0339, respectively). The success criteria and other variables did not reveal differences between interventions. CONCLUSIONS: In this 6-month follow-up study, pocket reduction was more pronounced in patients using the desiccant material. Pain was higher in patients using glycine. All the interventions resulted in low success rate.

Peri-implant bleeding on probing: a cross-sectional multilevel analysis of associated factors.

OBJECTIVES: The objective was to evaluate the association between peri-implant bleeding on probing (BoP) and probing depth. Other factors regarding patients, implants, and sites were taken into consideration. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Consecutive adult patients with ≥1 dental implant were eligible. Two calibrated operators examined the patients. BoP was the outcome variable. The effects of patient, implant and site factors on BoP were assessed using a 3-level logistic model. RESULTS: Fifty-two patients for a total of 92 implants and 552 sites were included in the analysis. The BoP was observed in 217 sites (39%). The odds ratio increased by 1.81 (95% CI from 1.47 to 2.23; P < 0.0001) for each 1 mm increment in probing pocket depth. A significant higher risk was observed also for interproximal vs. approximal surfaces (OR = 1.55; 95% CI from 1.02 to 2.36; P = 0.0402). CONCLUSIONS: Peri-implant bleeding was associated with site-specific factors.

A minimally invasive technique for lateral maxillary sinus floor elevation: a Bayesian network study.

OBJECTIVES: To describe a minimally invasive technique for lateral maxillary sinus elevation and to identify the relationship between the involved factors. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This is a retrospective study on patients treated with an original minimally invasive technique for lateral maxillary sinus elevation in a private dental clinic from 2008 to 2013. Failures, complications, and radiographic measurements were registered 9 months after surgery at the provisional prosthesis delivery. The relationship between demographic and clinical factors was investigated using Bayesian network analyses. RESULTS: One hundred and twenty-four patients (147 maxillary sinuses) were treated, and 242 implants were placed. Seven patients dropped out. A total of two implants in two patients failed. Perforation of the sinus membrane occurred in seven patients (6%). Five different complications in five patients were observed. Mean peri-implant marginal bone level 9 months after surgery was 1.10 ± 0.74 mm. Mean vertical bone gain was 7.44 ± 1.95 mm. Perforation was more frequently observed in patients that did not undergo the sedation procedure. Complications (excluding perforation and including implant failure) were more frequent in cases where only bone substitutes were used. CONCLUSIONS: This technique can be considered noninvasive, with a low early failure and early complication rate.

Bone level variation after vertical ridge augmentation: resorbable barriers versus titanium-reinforced barriers. A 6-year double-blind randomized clinical trial.

PURPOSE: To compare the efficacy of two different techniques for vertical bone regeneration at implant placement with particulate autogenous bone at 6 years after loading by means of a double-blind, superiority, parallel-group randomized clinical trial. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The study was conducted in a private center in Italy between April 2004 and December 2011. Patients in whom vertical bone augmentation was indicated in combination with the placement of single or multiple implants were eligible for inclusion in this trial. Patients were randomized to receive either resorbable collagen barriers supported by an osteosynthesis plate (test group) or nonresorbable titanium-reinforced expanded polytetrafluoroethylene barriers (control group). The outcome variables-radiographic bone variation at implant sites, implant failures, and complications- were evaluated 6 years after loading. Randomization was done by computer, with allocation concealed by opaque sequentially numbered sealed envelopes. The patients and the radiographic examiner were blinded to group assignment. RESULTS: Twenty-two patients were randomized: 11 to the resorbable barrier group and 11 to the nonresorbable (control) group. One control group patient dropped out. The mean bone level 6 years after surgery was 1.33 mm for the resorbable group and 1.00 mm for the nonresorbable group. The adjusted difference in bone changes between groups was 0.15 mm (95% confidence interval, -0.39 to 0.69, P = .5713). No implant failures or complications occurred after loading. CONCLUSION: No differences were observed in this comparison of resorbable and nonresorbable barriers with simultaneous implant placement for vertical ridge augmentation.

Inter-rater agreement in the diagnosis of mucositis and peri-implantitis.

AIM: The objective was to assess the inter-rater agreement in the diagnosis of mucositis and peri-implantitis. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Adult patients with ≥ 1 dental implant were eligible. Three operators examined the patients. One examiner allocated the patients to three groups of nine as follows: nine implants with peri-implantitis, nine implants with mucositis, and 9 implants with healthy mucosa. Each examiner recorded on all 27 patients (one implant per patient) recessions, probing depth, bleeding on probing, suppuration, keratinized tissue depth and bone loss, leading to a final diagnosis of mucositis, peri-implantitis or healthy mucosa. Examiners were independent and blinded to each other. RESULTS: Fleiss k-statistic with quadratic weight in the diagnosis of peri-implantitis and mucositis was 0.66 [CI95%: 0.45-0.87]. A complete agreement was obtained only in 14 cases (52%). Fleiss k-statistics in bleeding on probing and bone loss were respectively 0.31 [CI95%: 0.20-0.41] and 0.70 [CI95%: 0.45-0.94]. Intra-class correlation coefficients for recession, probing depth and keratinized tissue depth were respectively 0.69 [CI95%: 0.62-0.75], 0.54 [CI95%: 0.44-0.63] and 0.56 [CI95%: 0.27-0.77]. CONCLUSIONS: The inter-rater agreement in the diagnosis of peri-implant disease was qualified as merely good. This could also be due in part to the unclear definition of peri-implantitis and mucositis.

Immediate versus early nonocclusal loading of dental implants placed with a flapless procedure in partially edentulous patients: preliminary results from a randomized controlled clinical trial.

The aim of this randomized controlled clinical trial was to compare the efficacy of implants placed with a flapless procedure and restored immediately (test group) or early (6 weeks) (control group) in partially edentulous patients up to 1 year after loading. Both groups were nonocclusally loaded. Ten patients were included in each group. No patients dropped out and no failures were recorded. Two complications occurred in the early loading group, but both were resolved. It can be concluded that the use of a flapless technique for placing implants in conjunction with nonocclusal immediate loading in select patients can provide excellent clinical results. These preliminary findings should be confirmed by larger randomized clinical trials.

Immediate versus early non-occlusal loading of dental implants placed flapless in partially edentulous patients. One-year results from a randomised controlled trial.

AIMS: To compare immediate versus early (6 weeks) non-occlusal loading of dental implants placed flapless in partially edentulous patients 1 year after loading. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Sixty patients were randomised: 30 to the immediately loaded group and 30 to the early loaded group. In order to be immediately loaded, implants were inserted with a minimum torque of > or = 40Ncm. Implants were fully occlusally loaded after 6 months. Outcome measures were prosthesis and implant failures, and biological and biomechanical complications. RESULTS: Five implants in five patients randomised to the immediately loaded group did not reach the required primary implant stability. Three of these implants (two prostheses) were not immediately loaded. Two patients who were randomised to the early loaded group were immediately loaded erroneously. Implants in five patients of the early loaded group were conventionally loaded. No patient dropped out and there were no failures. Two complications occurred in the early and one in the immediately loaded group (no statistically significant difference), but were solved. CONCLUSIONS: The use of a flapless technique for placing dental implants in conjunction with non-occlusal immediate or early loading in selected patients can provide excellent clinical results. No differences were observed when comparing implants that were loaded immediately or early. Therefore, when a high primary implant stability is obtained, it might be preferable to load the implants immediately rather than waiting for a few weeks.

Computer-guided flapless placement of immediately loaded dental implants in the edentulous maxilla: a pilot prospective case series.

AIMS: The aim of this case series was to evaluate the Procera Software v1.6 and the surgical templates for flapless implant placement and immediate loading in atrophic fully edentulous maxillae. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The Procera Software was used to plan the exact position of the implants, and surgical templates were made to guide flapless implant placement. To allow for immediate loading, implants had to be placed with an insertion torque > 30 Ncm. Provisional cross-arch prostheses, produced before surgery using the software planning, were delivered immediately after implant placement, and replaced by final restorations after 6 months. Outcome measures were: prosthetic and implant failures, complications, post-operative pain and swelling, consumption of analgesics, and patient satisfaction. The followup stopped at 8 months post-loading. RESULTS: Thirteen consecutive patients with atrophic maxillae were treated with 89 implants (6 to 8 implants per patient). Two flaps had to be elevated in two patients. One template fractured during surgery. Three implants in two patients were not loaded immediately. In four patients, impressions had to be taken to fit the provisional prostheses onto the implants. Five implants failed in four patients. One patient dropped out, due to financial reasons, with the provisional prosthesis still in function. Eight months after loading, all prostheses were successful and 11 out of 12 patients reported their quality of life and lifestyle had improved. CONCLUSIONS: This software-based treatment planning may be useful in planning and treating challenging cases such as flapless implant placement and immediate loading of maxillary cross-arch bridges, but a learning curve is necessary.

Vertical bone augmentation with dental implant placement: efficacy and complications associated with 2 different techniques. A retrospective cohort study.

PURPOSE: To compare retrospectively the efficacy of and complications associated with 2 different techniques for vertical bone augmentation at implant placement: autogenous particulated bone grafts covered either by nonresorbable titanium-reinforced e-PTFE barriers or by resorbable collagen barriers supported by osteosynthesis plates. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Nineteen partially edentulous patients were consecutively treated: 11 patients had 18 implants treated for vertical bone augmentation with nonresorbable barriers, whereas 8 patients had 11 implants treated with resorbable barriers supported by osteosynthesis plates. Two independent assessors evaluated the amount of tissue regenerated and complications based on photographs and/or radiographs. RESULTS: No implants failed. In the group treated with nonresorbable barriers, complete bone regeneration was obtained for 12 of 18 implants. More than 50% of the planned regeneration was obtained for the remaining 6 implants. One patient had a dehiscence with suppuration that required an additional surgical intervention to remove the barrier. For resorbable barriers, complete regeneration was obtained for 10 of 11 implants. Dehiscences occurred in 2 patients. In 1 case no treatment was necessary. The other patient was treated with applications of chlorhexidine gel; more than 50% of the desired bone regeneration was obtained. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS: No statistically significant differences for the amount of regenerated tissue and complications were observed between the 2 techniques; however, the power of the study was too low to detect a difference, if any. Randomized clinical trials with a sufficient number of patients are needed to determine which could be the most effective technique for vertical ridge augmentation.

Horizontal and vertical ridge augmentation: a novel approach using osteosynthesis microplates, bone grafts, and resorbable barriers.

A novel approach to augmenting alveolar ridges simultaneously with implant placement is presented. The technique is based on the use of custom-shaped osteosynthesis plates, which are fixed to the bone with miniscrews. The plates provide a rigid scaffolding for bone chips. Resorbable barriers are used to cover the plates and the grafts. The results of three selected cases are presented. This technique is relatively simple, can be used in almost any clinical situation, and can provide excellent results.