Timeframe of socket cortication after tooth extraction: A retrospective radiographic study.

OBJECTIVES: To assess the timeframe between tooth extraction and radiographically detectable socket cortication in humans. METHODS: Two hundred and fifty patients with a CT scan ≤36 months after tooth extraction were included. First, three orthoradial multiplanar reconstruction slices, representing the major part of the extraction socket, were scored regarding the degree of bone healing as (i) healed, that is, complete/continuous cortication of the socket entrance, or (ii) non-healed. Thereafter, based on the results of all three slices, the stage of cortication of the extraction socket, as one unit, was classified as (i) non-corticated, that is, all three slices judged as non-healed, (ii) partially corticated, that is, 1 or 2 slices judged as non-healed, or (iii) completely corticated, that is, all three slices judged as healed. The possible effect of several independent parameters, that is, age, gender, timeframe between tooth extraction and CT scan, tooth type, extent of radiographic bone loss of the extracted tooth, tooth-gap type, smoking status, presence of any systemic disease, and medication intake, on cortication status was statistically evaluated. RESULTS: Three to 6 months after tooth extraction, 27% of the sockets were judged as non-corticated and 53% were judged as partially corticated. After 9-12 months, >80% of the sockets were corticated, while some incompletely corticated sockets were detected up to 15 months after extraction. Each additional month after tooth extraction contributed significantly to a higher likelihood of a more advanced stage of cortication, while radiographic bone loss ≥75% significantly prolonged cortication time; no other independent variable had a significant effect. CONCLUSIONS: The results indicate a considerably long timeframe until complete cortication of an extraction socket, that is, 3-6 months after tooth extraction 3 of 4 sockets were still not completely corticated, and only after 9-12 months, complete cortication was observed in about 80% of the sockets.

Trends in implant dentistry: Implant systems, complications and barriers in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia.

BACKGROUND: Patients who are partially dentate or edentulous can receive both conventional and implantsupported fixed prostheses, which leads to improvement in function, esthetics and self-esteem. Currently, implant dentistry is one of the fastest-growing disciplines in dentistry. OBJECTIVES: The aim of the study was to assess the education and training of dentists practicing implant therapy in the Riyadh region of Saudi Arabia, including their preferred dental implant systems, the clinical complications experienced as well as the barriers to implant therapy they encounter. MATERIAL AND METHODS: A self-administered questionnaire was distributed among dentists in Riyadh performing dental implants in both the state and private sectors. The questionnaire included demographic data, such as nationality, the practitioner's affiliated specialist category and their respective qualifications. Other data included their main sources of education pertaining to implant dentistry, the most commonly used implant systems, common clinical complications, and barriers to implant therapy. A descriptive statistical analysis of the data was carried out. RESULTS: A significant majority of non-Saudi dental practitioners were employed in the private sector (p = 0.001), whereas a significant majority of Saudi dental practitioners were employed in the state sector (p = 0.001). The largest group of practitioners performing implants were general dentists (48.1%). The 3iTM implant system was the most widely utilized (35.4%). Failed osseointegration (12.6%) and peri-implantitis (12%) were the most common clinical complications. The biggest barrier to placing implants was the cost of implants to patients (59.1%). CONCLUSIONS: Fundamental to implant practice is the clinical practitioner and patient selection. The utilization of implant systems should preferably be based on the chemical properties of implant surfaces which promote early osseointegration. Comparative studies investigating the reasons for failed osseointegration and other clinical complications are needed locally and internationally. Further research, together with advanced clinical specialist training, can lead to improvement in the quality of implant therapy for the benefit of patients.