Diagnostic methods/parameters to monitor peri-implant conditions.

The diagnostic accuracy of clinical parameters, including visual inspection and probing to monitor peri-implant conditions, has been regarded with skepticism. Scientific evidence pointed out that primary diagnostic tools (chairside) seem to be highly specific, while their sensitivity is lower compared with their use in monitoring periodontal stability. Nonetheless, given the association between pocket depth at teeth and implant sites and the aerobic/anaerobic nature of the microbiome, it seems plausible for pocket probing depth to be indicative of disease progression or tissue stability. In addition, understanding the inflammatory nature of peri-implant diseases, it seems reasonable to advocate that bleeding, erythema, ulceration, and suppuration might be reliable indicators of pathology. Nevertheless, single spots of bleeding on probing may not reflect peri-implant disease, since implants are prone to exhibit bleeding related to probing force. On the other side, bleeding in smokers lacks sensitivity owing to the decreased angiogenic activity. Hence, the use of dichotomous scales on bleeding in the general population, in contrast to indices that feature profuseness and time after probing, might lead to false positive diagnoses. The definitive distinction between peri-implant mucositis and peri-implantitis, though, relies upon the radiographic evidence of progressive bone loss that can be assessed by means of two- and three-dimensional methods. Accordingly, the objective of this review is to evaluate the existing clinical and radiographic parameters/methods to monitor peri-implant conditions.

Peri-implantitis as the consequence of errors in implant therapy.

Peri-implantitis is a plaque-associated pathologic condition occurring in tissues around dental implants, characterized by inflammation in the peri-implant mucosa and subsequent progressive loss of supporting bone. It is a highly prevalent disease, as extensively estimated by large-population, cross-sectional studies. As peri-implant diseases represent opportunistic infections, it is reasonable to assume that nonideal conditions, local and/or general, may favor the progression of peri-implant inflammation. Some of these conditions could be a result of poor planning and/or inadequate execution of any step of the entire process treatment. This article describes the major possible factors in implant therapy that may lead to peri-implantitis. For some of these (ie, inappropriate patient selection, insufficient periodontal therapy, lack of diagnosis and management of peri-implant mucositis, erratic supportive peri-implant/periodontal therapy) there is a good level of evidence, whereas for others (ie, wrong implant placement, poor postoperative care, inadequate prosthetic reconstruction, lack of assessment and management of peri-implant soft-tissue deficiencies) there is little scientific evidence. More research is therefore needed to clearly identify the errors and/or complications possibly leading to peri-implantitis, particularly over the long term.

Clinical periodontal diagnosis.

Periodontal diseases include pathological conditions elicited by the presence of bacterial biofilms leading to a host response. In the diagnostic process, clinical signs such as bleeding on probing, development of periodontal pockets and gingival recessions, furcation involvement and presence of radiographic bone loss should be assessed prior to periodontal therapy, following active therapy, and during long-term supportive care. In addition, patient-reported outcomes such as increased tooth mobility, migration, and tilting should also be considered. More important to the patient, however, is the fact that assessment of signs of periodontal diseases must be followed by an appropriate treatment plan. Furthermore, it should be realized that clinical and radiographic periodontal diagnosis is based on signs which may not reflect the presence of active disease but rather represent the sequelae of a previous bacterial challenge. Hence, the aim of the present review is to provide a summary of clinical and radiographic diagnostic criteria required to classify patients with periodontal health or disease.

Efficacy of mechanical/physical approaches for implant surface decontamination in non-surgical submarginal instrumentation of peri-implantitis. A systematic review.

AIM: To evaluate the efficacy of non-surgical submarginal peri-implant instrumentation with mechanical/physical decontamination compared to non-surgical submarginal instrumentation alone or with placebo decontamination in patients with peri-implantitis. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Three focused questions were addressed, and a systematic search for randomized controlled clinical trials (RCTs), controlled clinical trials, and prospective cohort studies with definitions of peri-implantitis and a minimal follow-up of 6 months was conducted. The main outcome variables were reduction in pocket probing depth (PD) and bleeding on probing (BOP). Suppuration on probing, marginal peri-implant bone level changes, patient-related outcomes and adverse events, implant survival, treatment success, and disease resolution were assessed as secondary outcomes. RESULTS: Out of 239 findings, full-text articles were assessed for eligibility, and 9 (n = 9 RCTs) were included in the present review. Five studies evaluated the effects of various laser types, and in four studies efficacy of air-abrasive mechanisms and of a novel ultrasonic device was determined. At 6 months, PD reductions were observed in nine studies but only Er, Cr:YSGG laser-treated group showed statistically significant higher reductions compared to the control group. BOP was statistically significantly reduced at 6 months in two studies following the application of Er:YAG laser compared to controls. One study reported statistically significant reduction in BOP following application of air-polishing device compared to control treatment. No statistically significant differences between treatment groups were reported for the secondary outcome variables. Owing to the large heterogeneity of study designs, no meta-analysis was performed. CONCLUSIONS: Available evidence on the efficacy of non-surgical submarginal peri-implant instrumentation with mechanical/physical decontamination is limited by the small number of controlled studies and the high heterogeneity of study protocols. Clinical and patient-reported benefits remain to be demonstrated.

Clinical and radiographic outcomes of implant-supported zirconia fixed dental prostheses with cantilever extension: A proof-of-principle study with a follow-up of at least 1 year.

OBJECTIVES: To test the reliability of full zirconia implant-supported fixed dental prostheses with cantilever extension (FDPCs) after at least 1 year of function. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Thirty-five patients in need of implant-supported single unit crowns (SUC) and FDPCs in posterior areas were enrolled. After implant placement, patients were rehabilitated with screw-retained full-zirconia FDPCs. Implant survival rate, pocket probing depth (PPD), presence/absence of bleeding on probing (BoP), and presence/absence of mechanical/technical complications were recorded. Mesial and distal radiographic marginal bone levels (mBLs) from baseline (i.e., recall appointment 3-6 months after implant loading [T0]) to the follow-up examination (i.e., latest recall appointment after at least 12 months after T0 [T1]), were calculated. RESULTS: Thirty patients with 34 FDPCs (31 SUCs and 3 FDPs) supported by 37 implants were available for analysis after a mean loading time of 2.6 ± 1.5 years (range: 13-87 months). No implants were lost. MBLs and mean PPD values did not change statistically significantly from T0 to T1 from 0.92 mm ± 0.42 to 0.96 mm ± 0.38 (95% CI: -0.07/0.17; p = .418) and from 2.99 mm ± 0.70 to 3.27 mm ± 0.71 (95% CI: -0.11/0.68; p = .25) respectively. Peri-implant mucositis was diagnosed in 22 cases. Screw-loosening and zirconia chipping occurred 1× in 4 patients. CONCLUSION: Within the limitations of the present proof-of-principle study, the use of full-zirconia FDPCs in posterior areas seems a valid and safe short-term treatment option.

Marginal bone level changes around dental implants with one or two adjacent teeth - A clinical and radiographic retrospective study with a follow-up of at least 10 years.

AIM: To compare mean bone level (mBL) changes around dental implants with one or two adjacent teeth after a function time of ≥10 years. MATERIALS AND METHODS: One hundred thirty three periodontally compromised patients (PCPs) with 551 implants enrolled in supportive periodontal care (SPC) were screened. Implants were categorized either into group TIT (tooth-implant-tooth) or into group TIG (tooth-implant-gap). MBL changes from delivery of restoration (i.e., baseline) to follow-up were calculated in millimeters and compared between implants and adjacent teeth. Survival rates and the need for surgical interventions during SPC were recorded. RESULTS: Eighty seven patients with 142 implants were re-evaluated after a mean observation time of 14.5 ± 3.5 years. The mBL at mesial implant sites in the TIT group increased -0.07 ± 0.92 mm and decreased in the TIG group 0.52 ± 1.34 mm, respectively (95% CI: 0.04/1.14, p = .037). At distal implant sites, the mBL in the TIT group increased -0.08 ± 0.84 mm and decreased 0.03 ± 0.87 in the TIG group, respectively (95% CI: -0.20/0.42, p = .48). The overall implant loss rate was 3.5% (n = 5; 2 TIT, 3 TIG), without a statistically significant difference between the two groups (95% CI: 0.18/7.07, p = .892). Tooth loss rates (TIT: 12.3%, TIG: 12.3%) were not statistically significantly different (OR = 1.00, p = .989). CONCLUSION: High tooth and implant survival rates were observed in PCPs. The presence of one or two adjacent teeth seemed to have no impact on marginal bone level changes.

Resolution of peri-implant mucositis at tissue- and bone-level implants: A 6-month prospective controlled clinical trial.

OBJECTIVE: The objective of the study was to compare resolution of inflammation of naturally occurring peri-implant mucositis (PM) at tissue-level (TL) and bone-level (BL) implants after non-surgical mechanical debridement. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Fifty-four patients with 74 Implants with PM were allocated in two groups (39 TL and 35 BL implants) and treated by means of subgingival debridement using a sonic scaler with a plastic tip without adjunctive measures. At baseline and at 1, 3, 6 months, the full-mouth plaque score (FMPS), full-mouth bleeding score (FMBS), probing depth (PD), bleeding on probing (BOP), and modified plaque index (mPlI) were recorded. The primary outcome was BOP change. RESULTS: After 6 months, the FMPS, FMBS, PD, and number of implants with plaque decreased statistically significantly in each group (p < .05); however, no statistically significant differences were found between TL and BL implants (p > .05). After 6 months, 17 (43.6%) TL and 14 (40%) BL implants showed a BOP change in (17.9%) and (11.4%), respectively. No statistical difference was recorded between groups. CONCLUSIONS: Within the limitations of present study, the findings showed no statistically significant differences in terms of changes in clinical parameters following non-surgical mechanical treatment of PM at TL and BL implants. A complete resolution of PM (i.e., no BOP at all implant sites) was not achieved in both groups.

Oral health-related quality of life of patients rehabilitated with fixed and removable implant-supported dental prostheses.

Dental implants have become a mainstream treatment approach in daily practice, and because of their high survival rates over time, they have become the preferred treatment option for prosthetic rehabilitation in many situations. Despite the relatively high predictability of implant therapy and high costs to patients, patient perceptions of success and patient-reported outcome measures have become increasingly significant in implant dentistry. Increasing numbers of publications deal with oral health-related quality of life and/or patient-reported outcome measures. The aim of this paper was to provide an overview of the available evidence on oral health-related quality of life of fully and partially dentate patients rehabilitated with fixed and removable implant-supported dental prostheses. A comprehensive electronic search was performed on publications in English up to 2021. A selection of standardized questionnaires and scales used for the evaluation of oral health-related quality of life were analyzed and explained. The analysis encompassed three aspects: a functional evaluation of oral health-related quality of life, an esthetic assessment of oral health-related quality of life, and a cost-related evaluation of oral health-related quality of life for rehabilitation with dental implants. The data demonstrated that the preoperative expectations of patients markedly affected the outcomes perceived by the patients. As expected, reconstructions supported by implants substantially improved the stability of conventional dentures and allowed improved function and patient satisfaction. However, from a patient's perspective, oral health-related quality of life was not significantly greater for dental implants compared with conventional tooth-supported prostheses. The connection of the implants to the prostheses with locators or balls indicated high oral health-related quality of life. The data also suggest that patient expectation is not a good predictor of treatment outcome. In terms of esthetic outcomes, the data clearly indicate that patients' perceptions and clinicians' assessments differed, with those of clinicians yielding higher standards. There were no significant differences found between the esthetic oral health-related quality of life ratings for soft tissue-level implants compared with those for bone-level implants. Comparison of all-ceramic and metal-ceramic restorations showed no significant differences in patients' perceptions in terms of esthetic outcomes. Depending on the choice of outcome measure and financial marginal value, supporting a conventional removable partial denture with implants is cost-effective when the patient is willing to invest more to achieve a higher oral health-related quality of life. In conclusion, the oral health-related quality of life of patients rehabilitated with implant-supported dental prostheses did not show overall superiority over conventional prosthetics. Clinicians' and patients' evaluations, especially of esthetic outcomes, are, in the majority of cases, incongruent. Nevertheless, patient-reported outcomes are important in the evaluation of function, esthetics, and the cost-effectiveness of treatment with implant-supported dental prostheses, and should be taken into consideration in daily practice.

Effect of combined periodontal and orthodontic treatment of tilted molars and of teeth with intra-bony and furcation defects in stage-IV periodontitis patients: A systematic review.

AIM: To assess the effect of combined periodontal and orthodontic treatment (OT) in stage-IV periodontitis patients. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Three focused questions were addressed using the Population, Intervention, Comparison, Outcome, and Study Design criteria. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs), controlled clinical trials, follow-up studies, case series, and controlled/uncontrolled before/after studies were assessed for inclusion. Primary outcomes included mean changes in pocket probing depth (PPD) and clinical attachment level (CAL). Qualitative synthesis of results was performed and reported according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. RESULTS: Out of 916 records, 1 retrospective case series study reported the effect of OT of tilted molars, 2 RCTs and 10 prospective and 2 retrospective case series studies reported the effect of OT of treated intra-bony defects and 0 articles reported the effect of OT of treated furcation defects. Mean PPD changes were reported in 14 articles, and mean CAL changes were reported in 8 articles. Risk of bias was high in both included RCTs, critical in nine articles, and serious in four articles. No articles included patient-reported outcomes, and three articles reported harms/adverse effects. CONCLUSIONS: Evidence is limited by (i) the lack or low number of included studies, (ii) the apparent methodological and clinical heterogeneity, and (iii) the high risk of bias of the retrieved studies. No solid conclusions could be drawn concerning OT in stage-IV periodontitis patients with respect to tilted molars, teeth with treated intra-bony defects, and teeth with treated furcation defects.

Clinical outcomes of dental implants in patients with and without history of periodontitis: A 20-year prospective study.

AIM: To present the 20-year clinical outcomes of tissue-level implants in partially edentulous patients previously treated for periodontitis and in periodontally healthy patients (PHP). MATERIAL AND METHODS: The original population consisted of 149 partially edentulous patients consecutively enrolled in a private specialist practice and divided into three groups: PHP, moderately periodontally compromised patients (mPCP) and severely PCP (sPCP). After successful completion of periodontal/implant therapy, patients were enrolled in an individualized supportive periodontal care (SPC) programme. RESULTS: Eighty-four patients rehabilitated with 172 implants reached the 20-year examination. During the observation time, 12 implants were removed (i.e., 11 due to biological complications and 1 due to implant fracture), leading to an overall implant survival rate of 93% (i.e., 94.9% for PHP, 91.8% for mPCP and 93.1% for sPCP [p = .29]). At 20 years, PCP compliant with SPC did not present with significantly higher odds of implant loss compared with PHP compliant with SPC (p > .05). Conversely, PCP not compliant with SPC experienced implant loss with odds ratio of 14.59 (1.30-164.29, p = .03). CONCLUSIONS: Tissue-level implants, placed after comprehensive periodontal therapy and SPC, yield favourable long-term results. However, patients with a history of periodontitis and non-compliant with SPC are at higher risk of biological complications and implant loss.

Non-surgical mechanical therapy of peri-implantitis with or without repeated adjunctive diode laser application. A 6-month double-blinded randomized clinical trial.

OBJECTIVES: The objective of this study is to investigate the outcomes following non-surgical therapy of peri-implantitis (PI) with or without adjunctive diode laser application. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A double-blinded randomized controlled clinical trial was carried out in 25 subjects with 25 implants diagnosed with PI. Following curettage of granulation tissue, test implants (T) were treated with adjunctive application of a diode laser for 90 s (settings: 810 nm, 2.5 W, 50 Hz, 10 ms), while at control implants (C) non-activated adjunctive diode laser was applied. The entire treatment procedure was performed at days 0 (i.e., baseline), 7 and 14. The primary outcome measure was change in mean pocket probing depth (PPD). Clinical and microbiological outcomes, as well as host-derived inflammatory markers were evaluated at baseline, 3 and 6 months, while radiographic outcomes were assessed at baseline and at the 6-month follow-up. RESULTS: No statistically significant differences with respect to baseline patient characteristic were observed. After 6 months, both test and control implants yielded statistically significant PPD changes compared with baseline (T: 1.28 and C: 1.47 mm) but without statistically significant difference between groups (p = .381). No statistically significant changes in peri-implant marginal bone levels were detected (p = .936). No statistically significant differences between test and control implants were observed with respect to microbiological and host-derived parameters (p > .05). At the 6-month follow-up, treatment success was observed in 41.7% (n = 5) of test and 46.2% (n = 6) of control patients, respectively (p = .821). CONCLUSION: Repeated adjunctive application of diode laser in the non-surgical management of PI failed to provide significant benefits compared with mechanical instrumentation alone.

Enamel matrix derivative as adjunctive to non-surgical periodontal therapy: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

OBJECTIVES: To assess the potential additional benefit of the local application of enamel matrix derivative (EMD) on the clinical outcomes following non-surgical periodontal therapy (NSPT) (steps 1 and 2 periodontal therapy). MATERIALS AND METHODS: A systematic literature search was performed in several electronic databases, including Medline/PubMed, Embase, The Cochrane Register of Central Trials (CENTRAL), LILACS, and grey literature. Only randomized controlled clinical trials (RCTs) were eligible for inclusion. Clinical attachment level (CAL) change (primary outcome), probing pocket depth (PPD), and bleeding on probing (BoP) reductions (secondary outcomes) were evaluated. The Cochrane Risk of Bias tool (RoB 2.0) was used to assess the quality of the included trials. Weighted mean differences (WMDs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) between test and control sites were estimated using a random-effect model for amount of mean CAL and PPD change. RESULTS: Six RCTs were included for the qualitative analysis, while data from 4 studies were used for meta-analysis. Overall analysis of CAL gain (3 studies) and PPD reduction (4 studies) presented WMD of 0.14 mm (p = 0.74; CI 95% - 0.66; 0.94) and 0.46 mm (p = 0.25; CI 95% - 0.33; 1.26) in favor of NSPT + EMD compared to NSPT alone respectively. Statistical heterogeneity was found to be high in both cases (I2 = 79% and 87%, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Within their limitations, the present data indicate that the local application of EMD does not lead to additional clinical benefits after 3 to 12 months when used as an adjunctive to NSPT. However, due to the high heterogeneity among the studies, additional well-designed RCTs are needed to provide further evidence on this clinical indication for the use of EMD. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: The adjunctive use of EMD to NSPT does not seem to additionally improve the clinical outcomes obtained with NSPT alone.

Microbial and host-derived biomarker changes during ligature-induced and spontaneous peri-implantitis in the Beagle dog.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate microbial and host-derived biomarker changes during experimental peri-implantitis in the Beagle dog. BACKGROUND: Limited data exist on the microbial and biomarker changes during progressive bone loss as result of experimental peri-implantitis. METHODS: In total, 36 implants (ndogs  = 6) were assessed over 3 episodes of ligature-induced peri-implantitis followed by a period of spontaneous progression. Implants with hybrid (H) and completely rough (R) surface designs were used. Clinical and radiographic parameters were recorded at 4 timepoints. Peri-implant sulcus fluid was collected from the buccal and lingual aspects of the implants. The presence of 7 bacterial species and 2 host-derived biomarkers was assessed during the study period. RESULTS: Total bacterial counts were significantly correlated with marginal bone loss (MBL) (r = .21; P = .009). Further, Phorphyromonas gulae (Pg) and Tannerella forsythia (Tf) were commonly correlated with MBL, suppuration (SUP) and the sulcular bleeding index scores (mSBI) (P < .05). Other bacteria were further correlated with SUP, mSBI, and MBL. While the analyzed bacteria dropped, Prevotella intermedia (Pi) further increased during the spontaneous progressive phase (P < .05). Total bacterial load did not differ significantly between H and R implants. Host-derived IL-10 was undetected along the study period. IL-1ß positively correlated with probing pocket depth (r = .18; P = .03). During spontaneous progression, H implants displayed statistically significant lower levels of IL-1ß (P = .003). CONCLUSION: Experimental peri-implantitis is associated with an increase in bacterial counts. While Pg and Tf are associated with ligature-induced disease progression, Pi augmented its load during the spontaneous progressive phase. IL-1ß is associated with pocket probing depth and influenced by implant surface characteristics during the spontaneous progression phase.

Evaluation of the implant disease risk assessment (IDRA) tool: A retrospective study in patients with treated periodontitis and implant-supported fixed dental prostheses (FDPs).

AIM: To evaluate the Implant Disease Risk Assessment (IDRA) tool for the prediction of peri-implantitis in treated periodontitis patients with implant-supported fixed dental prostheses (FDPs) after at least 5 years of function. MATERIAL AND METHODS: From the patient pool of implant patients enrolled in a regular supportive periodontal therapy programme (SPT) for at least 5 years, 239 patients were screened. Eighty patients met the inclusion criteria and underwent evaluation through the criteria of the IDRA tool. Areas under the curve (AUCs) for receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves including 95% confidence intervals were estimated. RESULTS: Seventy-nine patients (43 males and 36 females, 8 smokers), aged on average 59.0 years (range: 40-79 years) at baseline (i.e. FDP delivery) were analysed. The calculated IDRA-risk was in 34 patients (42.5%) a moderate risk, while 45 patients (56.3%) were considered at high IDRA-risk. One patient categorized at low IDRA-risk was excluded from the analysis. The AUC was 0.613 (95% CI: 0.464-0.762) if the IDRA-risk was associated with prevalence of peri-implantitis at the most recent follow-up. Peri-implantitis was diagnosed in 4 patients (12%) at moderate and in 12 patients (27%) at high IDRA-risk, respectively. The calculated odds ratio for developing peri-implantitis in patients with high IDRA-risk compared with patients with moderate IDRA-risk was 2.727 with no statistically significant difference between the two groups (95% CI: 0.793-9.376). CONCLUSION: Within the limitations of the present retrospective study, the IDRA algorithm might represent a promising tool to assess patients at moderate or high risk of developing peri-implantitis.

Vertical-guided bone regeneration with a titanium-reinforced d-PTFE membrane utilizing a novel split-thickness flap design: a prospective case series.

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the feasibility of a newly proposed minimally invasive split-thickness flap design without vertical-releasing incisions for vertical bone regeneration performed in either a simultaneous or staged approach and to analyze the prevalence of adverse events during postoperative healing. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Following preparation of a split-thickness flap and bilaminar elevation of the mucosa and underlying periosteum, the alveolar bone was exposed over the defects, vertical GBR was performed by means of a titanium-reinforced high-density polytetrafluoroethylene membrane combined with particulated autogenous bone (AP) and bovine-derived xenograft (BDX) in 1:1 ratio. At 9 months after reconstructive surgery, vertical and horizontal hard tissue gain was evaluated based on clinical and radiographic examination. RESULTS: Twenty-four vertical alveolar ridge defects in 19 patients were treated with vertical GBR. In case of 6 surgical sites, implant placement was performed at the time of the GBR (simultaneous group); in the remaining 18 surgical, sites implant placement was performed 9 months after the ridge augmentation (staged group). After uneventful healing in 23 cases, hard tissue fill was detected in each site. Direct clinical measurements confirmed vertical and horizontal hard tissue gain averaging 3.2 ± 1.9 mm and 6.5 ± 0.5 mm respectively, in the simultaneous group and 4.5 ± 2.2 mm and 8.7 ± 2.3 mm respectively, in the staged group. Additional radiographic evaluation based on CBCT data sets in the staged group revealed mean vertical and horizontal hard tissue fill of 4.2 ± 2.0 mm and 8.5 ± 2.4 mm. Radiographic volume gain was 1.1 ± 0.4 cm3. CONCLUSION: Vertical GBR consisting of a split-thickness flap and using titanium-reinforced non-resorbable membrane in conjunction with a 1:1 mixture of AP+BDX may lead to a predictable vertical and horizontal hard tissue reconstruction. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: The used split-thickness flap design may represent a valuable approach to increase the success rate of vertical GBR, resulting in predicable hard tissue regeneration, and favorable wound healing with low rate of membrane exposure.

Changes in clinical parameters following adjunctive local sodium hypochlorite gel in minimally invasive nonsurgical therapy (MINST) of periodontal pockets: a 6-month randomized controlled clinical trial.

BACKGROUND: The mechanical disruption and removal of the subgingival biofilm represent the most important step in the treatment of periodontitis. However, in deep periodontal pockets, mechanical removal of the subgingival biofilm is difficult and frequently incomplete. Preliminary findings indicate that the use of amino acid buffered sodium hypochlorite (NaOCl) gel may chemically destroy the bacterial biofilm and facilitate its mechanical removal. OBJECTIVES: To clinically evaluate the efficacy of minimally invasive nonsurgical therapy (MINST) of periodontal pockets with or without local application of an amino acid buffered sodium hypochlorite (NaOCl) gel. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Forty untreated patients diagnosed with severe/advanced periodontitis (i.e. stage III/IV) with a slow/moderate rate of progression (i.e. grade A/B) were randomly allocated in two treatment groups. In the test group, the periodontal pockets were treated by means of MINST and NaOCl gel application, while in the control group, treatment consisted of MINST alone. Full-mouth plaque scores (FMPS), full-mouth bleeding scores (FMBS), probing depths (PD), clinical attachment levels (CAL) and gingival recessions (GR) were assessed at baseline and at 6 months following therapy. The primary outcome variable was PD reduction at sites with PD ≥ 5 mm at baseline. RESULTS: At 6 months, statistically significant differences between the two groups were found (p = 0.001) in terms of PD and CAL change. No statistically significant differences were found in terms of GR (p = 0.81). The number of sites with PD ≥ 5 mm and BOP (+) decreased statistically significantly (p = 0.001), i.e. from 85.3 to 2.2% in the test group and from 81.6 to 7.3% in the control group, respectively. Statistically significant differences between test and control groups were recorded at 6 months (p = 0.001). MINST + NaOCl compared to MINST alone decreased statistically significantly (p = 0.001) the probability of residual PDs ≥ 5 mm with BOP- (14.5% vs 18.3%) and BOP+ (2.2% vs. 7.2%). CONCLUSIONS: Within their limits, the present results indicate that (a) the use of MINST may represent a clinically valuable approach for nonsurgical therapy and (b) the application of NaOCl gel in conjunction with MINST may additionally improve the clinical outcomes compared to the use of MINST alone. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: In patients with untreated periodontitis, treatment of deep pockets by means of MINST in conjunction with a NaOCl gel may represent a valuable approach to additionally improve the clinical outcomes obtained with MINST alone.

Efficacy of laser monotherapy or non-surgical mechanical instrumentation in the management of untreated periodontitis patients. A systematic review and meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate and compare the effects of laser monotherapy with non-surgical mechanical instrumentation alone in untreated periodontitis patients. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A focused question was formulated based on the Population, Intervention, Comparison, Outcome, and Study design criteria (PICOS): in patients with untreated periodontitis, does laser mono-therapy provide adjunctive effects on pocket probing depth (PPD) changes compared with non-surgical instrumentation alone? Both randomized controlled clinical trials (RCTs) and controlled clinical trials (CCTs) were included. The results of the meta-analyses are expressed as weighted mean differences (WMD) and reported according to the PRISMA guidelines. RESULTS: The search yielded 1268 records, out of which 8 articles could be included. With respect to PPD changes, a meta-analysis including 5 articles (n = 148) failed to identify statistically significant differences in favor of laser monotherapy for PPD change (WMD = 0.14 mm; 95% CI: - 0.04/0.32; z = 1.51; p = 0.132) nor for clinical attachment level (CAL) (WMD = 0.04 mm; 95% CI: - 0.35/0.42; z = 0.19; p = 0.850). Data on cost-effectiveness are lacking. One study reported patient-related outcome measures (PROMS). CONCLUSIONS: In untreated periodontitis patients, laser monotherapy does not yield superior clinical benefits compared with non-surgical mechanical instrumentation alone. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: In untreated periodontitis patients, mechanical instrumentation with hand and/or ultrasonic instruments remains the standard of care.

Healing of periodontal suprabony defects following treatment with open flap debridement with or without an enamel matrix derivative: A randomized controlled clinical study.

OBJECTIVES: To compare the healing of suprabony defects following treatment with either open flap debridement (OFD) and application of an enamel matrix derivative (EMD) with OFD alone. METHODS: Eighty patients with suprabony periodontal defects were randomly assigned to treatment with OFD + EMD (test) or OFD alone (control). The primary outcome variable was the difference in clinical attachment level (CAL) gain. At baseline and after 12 months, full-mouth plaque scores (FMPS), full-mouth bleeding scores (FMBS), probing depths (PD), gingival recessions (GR), and CAL were recorded. RESULTS: Sixty-five patients were available for the 12-month follow-up examination. At 12 months, the mean FMPS was 21.9 ± 3.0% in the OFD + EMD and 21.1 ± 2.4% in the OFD group, respectively (p = 0.30), while mean FMBS measured 20.4 ± 3.4% in the OFD + EMD group and 19.9 ± 2.9% in the OFD group (p = 0.48). Mean CAL gain at sites treated with OFD + EMD was statistically significantly different (p = 0.0001) compared with sites treated with OFD alone (3.4 ± 0.6 mm vs 1.8 ± 0.6 mm). A statistically significant difference (p = 0.0001) was found between mean PD change in the OFD + EMD (3.9 ± 0.6 mm) and OFD alone (3.2 ± 0.6 mm) treated groups and also in terms of mean GR change between treatment with OFD + EMD (0.5 ± 0.7 mm) and OFD alone (1.4 ± 1.0 mm) (p = 0.001). CONCLUSION: Within their limits, the present results indicate that in suprabony periodontal defects, the application of EMD in conjunction with OFD may additionally improve the clinical outcomes compared with OFD alone. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: In periodontal suprabony defects, the application of EMD in conjunction with OFD may additionally enhance the clinical outcomes in terms of CAL gain and PD reduction.

Adjunctive laser or antimicrobial photodynamic therapy to non-surgical mechanical instrumentation in patients with untreated periodontitis: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

AIM: To compare the adjunctive effects of lasers or antimicrobial photodynamic therapy (aPDT) to non-surgical mechanical instrumentation alone in untreated periodontitis patients. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Two focused questions were addressed using the Population, Intervention, Comparison and Outcome criteria as follows: in patients with untreated periodontitis, (a) does laser application provide adjunctive effects on probing pocket depth (PPD) changes compared with non-surgical instrumentation alone? and (b) does application of aPDT provide adjunctive effects on PPD changes compared with non-surgical instrumentation alone? Both randomized controlled clinical trials (RCTs) and controlled clinical trials (CCTs) were included. Results of the meta-analysis are expressed as weighted mean differences (WMD) and reported according to the PRISMA guidelines. RESULTS: Out of 1,202 records, 10 articles for adjunctive laser and 8 for adjunctive aPDT were included. With respect to PPD changes, 1 meta-analysis including 2 articles (total n = 42; split-mouth design) failed to identify a statistically significant difference (WMD = 0.35 mm; 95%CI: -0.04/0.73; p = .08) in favour of adjunctive aPDT (wavelength range 650-700 nm). In terms of adjunctive laser application, a high variability of clinical outcomes at 6 months was noted. Two articles included patient-reported outcomes and 10 reported on the presence/absence of harms/adverse effects. CONCLUSIONS: Available evidence on adjunctive therapy with lasers and aPDT is limited by (a) the low number of controlled studies and (b) the heterogeneity of study designs. Patient-reported benefits remain to be demonstrated.

Clinical and radiographic changes at tissue level implants with either a machined or a modified transmucosal neck surface: A 3-year multicentre randomized controlled proof-of-concept study.

BACKGROUND: Surface modification may yield enhanced soft tissue adhesion to transmucosal titanium implant necks. AIM: To evaluate and compare changes in soft tissues around implants with a modified hydrophilic sandblasted and acid-etched neck (mSLA; test) to those with a machined neck (M; control). MATERIALS AND METHODS: Implants with a diameter of 4.1 mm and a neck height of 1.8 mm were randomly inserted in healed sites with pristine bone of the posterior maxilla or mandible. The modified Sulcus Bleeding Index (mSBI) (primary outcome) was assessed at baseline (BL) and 6, 12 and 36 months. Secondary outcomes included the assessment of pocket probing depth (PPD), mucosal recession (REC) and clinical attachment level (CAL). Standardized radiographs were taken at time of implant placement, at BL and after 12 and 36 months. RESULTS: Of the 43 randomized subjects, 38 (19 test and 19 controls) completed the 36-month follow-up. Implant survival rates amounted to 95.5% (test) and 100% (control) (p > .05). At 36 months, 77.6% of test implants and 78.9% of control implants were without any bleeding sites (mSBI = 0; p > .05). The 36-month success rate was 86.4% in the test and 85.7% in the control group, respectively (p > .05). At 36 months, the mean radiographic bone level change from BL was 0.33 ± 0.69 mm at test implants and 0.12 ± 0.3 mm at control implants (p > .05). CONCLUSION: Tissue level implants with a hydrophilic mSLA transmucosal neck failed to yield clinical and radiographic benefits compared with implants with a machined neck up to 3 years.