Esthetic, clinical, and radiographic outcomes of two surgical approaches for single implant in the esthetic area: 1-year results of a randomized controlled trial with parallel design.

AIM: The objectives of this study were to compare (a) esthetic, (b) clinical, (c) radiographic, and (d) patient-centered outcomes following immediate (Type 1) and early implant placement (Type 2). MATERIAL AND METHODS: Forty-six subjects needing a single extraction (premolar to premolar) were randomly allocated to Type 1 or Type 2 implant placement. One year following permanent restoration, evaluation of (a) Esthetics using soft tissue positions, and the pink and white esthetic scores (PES/WES), (b) Clinical performance using probing depth, modified plaque index, and sulcus bleeding index (c) Radiographic bone level, and (d) Patient satisfaction by means of visual analogue scales (VAS) was recorded. RESULTS: Thirty-five patients completed the one-year examination (Type 1, n = 20; Type 2, n = 15). Type 1 implants lost 1.03 ± 0.24 mm (mean ± SE) of mid-facial soft tissue height while Type 2 implants lost 1.37 ± 0.28 mm (p = 0.17). The papillae height on the mesial and distal was reduced about 1 mm following both procedures. Frequency of clinical acceptability as defined by PES ≥ 6 (Type 1: 55% vs. Type 2 40%), WES ≥ 6 (Type 1: 45% vs. Type 2 27%) was not significantly different between groups (p > 0.05). Clinical and radiographic were indicative of peri-implant health. Patient-centered outcomes failed to demonstrate significant differences between the two cohorts. CONCLUSION: One year after final restoration, there were no significant differences in esthetic, clinical, radiographic, and patient-centered outcomes following Type 1 and Type 2 implant placement. At one year, patient satisfaction may be achieved irrespective of the two placement protocols.

Dental plaque-induced gingival conditions.

OBJECTIVE: This review proposes revisions to the current classification system for gingival diseases and provides a rationale for how it differs from the 1999 classification system. IMPORTANCE: Gingival inflammation in response to bacterial plaque accumulation (microbial biofilms) is considered the key risk factor for the onset of periodontitis. Thus, control of gingival inflammation is essential for the primary prevention of periodontitis. FINDINGS: The clinical characteristics common to dental plaque-induced inflammatory gingival conditions include: a) clinical signs and symptoms of inflammation that are confined to the gingiva: b) reversibility of the inflammation by removing or disrupting the biofilm; c) the presence of a high bacterial plaque burden to initiate the inflammation; d) systemic modifying factors (e.g., hormones, systemic disorders, drugs) which can alter the severity of the plaque-induced inflammation and; e) stable (i.e., non-changing) attachment levels on a periodontium which may or may not have experienced a loss of attachment or alveolar bone. The simplified taxonomy of gingival conditions includes: 1) introduction of the term "incipient gingivitis;" 2) a description of the extent and severity of gingival inflammation; 3) a description of the extent and severity of gingival enlargement and; 4) a reduction of categories in the dental plaque-induced gingival disease taxonomy. CONCLUSIONS: Dental plaque-induced gingival inflammation is modified by various systemic and oral factors. The appropriate intervention is crucial for the prevention of periodontitis.

A new classification scheme for periodontal and peri-implant diseases and conditions - Introduction and key changes from the 1999 classification.

A classification scheme for periodontal and peri-implant diseases and conditions is necessary for clinicians to properly diagnose and treat patients as well as for scientists to investigate etiology, pathogenesis, natural history, and treatment of the diseases and conditions. This paper summarizes the proceedings of the World Workshop on the Classification of Periodontal and Peri-implant Diseases and Conditions. The workshop was co-sponsored by the American Academy of Periodontology (AAP) and the European Federation of Periodontology (EFP) and included expert participants from all over the world. Planning for the conference, which was held in Chicago on November 9 to 11, 2017, began in early 2015. An organizing committee from the AAP and EFP commissioned 19 review papers and four consensus reports covering relevant areas in periodontology and implant dentistry. The authors were charged with updating the 1999 classification of periodontal diseases and conditions and developing a similar scheme for peri-implant diseases and conditions. Reviewers and workgroups were also asked to establish pertinent case definitions and to provide diagnostic criteria to aid clinicians in the use of the new classification. All findings and recommendations of the workshop were agreed to by consensus. This introductory paper presents an overview for the new classification of periodontal and peri-implant diseases and conditions, along with a condensed scheme for each of four workgroup sections, but readers are directed to the pertinent consensus reports and review papers for a thorough discussion of the rationale, criteria, and interpretation of the proposed classification. Changes to the 1999 classification are highlighted and discussed. Although the intent of the workshop was to base classification on the strongest available scientific evidence, lower level evidence and expert opinion were inevitably used whenever sufficient research data were unavailable. The scope of this workshop was to align and update the classification scheme to the current understanding of periodontal and peri-implant diseases and conditions. This introductory overview presents the schematic tables for the new classification of periodontal and peri-implant diseases and conditions and briefly highlights changes made to the 1999 classification. It cannot present the wealth of information included in the reviews, case definition papers, and consensus reports that has guided the development of the new classification, and reference to the consensus and case definition papers is necessary to provide a thorough understanding of its use for either case management or scientific investigation. Therefore, it is strongly recommended that the reader use this overview as an introduction to these subjects. Accessing this publication online will allow the reader to use the links in this overview and the tables to view the source papers (Table ).

Periodontal health and gingival diseases and conditions on an intact and a reduced periodontium: Consensus report of workgroup 1 of the 2017 World Workshop on the Classification of Periodontal and Peri-Implant Diseases and Conditions.

Periodontal health is defined by absence of clinically detectable inflammation. There is a biological level of immune surveillance that is consistent with clinical gingival health and homeostasis. Clinical gingival health may be found in a periodontium that is intact, i.e. without clinical attachment loss or bone loss, and on a reduced periodontium in either a non-periodontitis patient (e.g. in patients with some form of gingival recession or following crown lengthening surgery) or in a patient with a history of periodontitis who is currently periodontally stable. Clinical gingival health can be restored following treatment of gingivitis and periodontitis. However, the treated and stable periodontitis patient with current gingival health remains at increased risk of recurrent periodontitis, and accordingly, must be closely monitored. Two broad categories of gingival diseases include non-dental plaque biofilm-induced gingival diseases and dental plaque-induced gingivitis. Non-dental plaque biofilm-induced gingival diseases include a variety of conditions that are not caused by plaque and usually do not resolve following plaque removal. Such lesions may be manifestations of a systemic condition or may be localized to the oral cavity. Dental plaque-induced gingivitis has a variety of clinical signs and symptoms, and both local predisposing factors and systemic modifying factors can affect its extent, severity, and progression. Dental plaque-induced gingivitis may arise on an intact periodontium or on a reduced periodontium in either a non-periodontitis patient or in a currently stable "periodontitis patient" i.e. successfully treated, in whom clinical inflammation has been eliminated (or substantially reduced). A periodontitis patient with gingival inflammation remains a periodontitis patient (Figure 1), and comprehensive risk assessment and management are imperative to ensure early prevention and/or treatment of recurrent/progressive periodontitis. Precision dental medicine defines a patient-centered approach to care, and therefore, creates differences in the way in which a "case" of gingival health or gingivitis is defined for clinical practice as opposed to epidemiologically in population prevalence surveys. Thus, case definitions of gingival health and gingivitis are presented for both purposes. While gingival health and gingivitis have many clinical features, case definitions are primarily predicated on presence or absence of bleeding on probing. Here we classify gingival health and gingival diseases/conditions, along with a summary table of diagnostic features for defining health and gingivitis in various clinical situations.

A cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) study of buccal plate thickness of the maxillary and mandibular posterior dentition.

BACKGROUND: Buccal plate thickness is of clinical importance in treatment planning for implants. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the buccal plate thickness in posterior dentate areas of both the maxilla and mandible using cone beam computed tomography in order to estimate the approximate distributions of this anatomic variable. METHODS: Two hundred and sixty-five subjects were included for a total of nine hundred and thirty-four roots assessed by cone beam computed tomography. CBCT scans were taken and evaluated at the ideal buccolingual cross-sections of each root at 1 mm, 3 mm, and 5 mm apical to the alveolar crest to measure buccal plate thickness. Data are reported by geometric means and 95% confidence intervals. RESULTS: Both arches demonstrated increasing buccal plate thickness from anterior to posterior. Maxillary teeth had a significant decrease in thickness from coronal to apical along the tooth root (P < 0.001), except at second molars. The first premolar and mesial root of the first molar were significantly thinner than all other roots in the maxilla. Conversely, the mandible demonstrated a significant increase in buccal plate thickness from coronal to apical (P < 0.001). The premolars were significantly thinner than all other roots. Age and sex were found to have limited impact on buccal plate thickness in both arches. CONCLUSIONS: Buccal plate thickness is highly dependent upon the arch position, tooth location, and measurement point, but age and sex have limited impact.

Esthetic, clinical and patient-centered outcomes of immediately placed implants (Type 1) and early placed implants (Type 2): preliminary 3-month results of an ongoing randomized controlled clinical trial.

AIM: The objective of the study was to compare (i) esthetic, (ii) clinical and (iii) patient-centered outcomes following immediate (Type 1) and early implant placement (Type 2). MATERIAL AND METHODS: Thirty-eight subjects needing a single extraction (premolar to premolar) were randomly allocated to Type 1 or Type 2 implant placement. Three months following permanent crown insertion, evaluation of (i) esthetic outcomes using soft tissue positions, and the pink and white esthetic scores (PES/WES), (ii) clinical performance using probing pocket depth (PPD), modified plaque index (mPI) and modified sulcus bleeding index (mSBI) around each implant and (iii) patient satisfaction by means of a questionnaire using a visual analogue scale (VAS) was performed. RESULTS: Thirty-two patients completed the 3-month follow-up examination (Type 1, n = 17; Type 2, n = 15) with a 100% implant survival rate. Type 1 implants lost 0.54 ± 0.18 mm of mid-facial soft tissue height, while Type 2 implants lost 0.47 ± 0.31 mm (P > 0.05). The papillae height on the mesial and distal was reduced about 1 mm following both procedures. The PES/WES following Type 1 implant placement amounted to 13.7 ± 0.6 and 12.5 ± 0.7 in the Type 2 group (P > 0.05). PPD, mPI and mSBI were low in both groups (P > 0.05). Patient-centered outcomes failed to demonstrate any statistical difference between the two cohorts. CONCLUSION: Three months following final crown delivery, there were no significant differences in esthetic, clinical and patient-centered outcomes following Type 1 and Type 2 implant placement. On the short term, one may achieve good optimal esthetic and clinical results irrespective of these two placement protocols. These results need to be confirmed on the long term.

Histologic wound healing in studies using different ridge preservation protocols: A review.

BACKGROUND: Alveolar ridge preservation (ARP) procedures are designed to lessen dimensional changes in the alveolar ridge after tooth extraction. Wound healing after ridge preservation involves the formation of new vital bone in the former socket, and this vital bone is important in the osseointegration of dental implants. METHODS: A series of ARP studies have been performed to help clinicians better understand the wound-healing events that occur following tooth extraction and ridge preservation. Different protocols have been examined using various materials and periods of healing time prior to implant placement. The primary aim of these studies was to ascertain the relative percentage of vital bone formation, residual graft material, and connective tissue (CT)/other at the healing site using histomorphometric examination of bone core biopsies obtained during osteotomy preparation. RESULTS: For allografts, the use of demineralized bone alone or in combination with mineralized is associated with more vital bone formation than the use of mineralized allograft alone. For mineralized allografts, the use of cortical versus cancellous bone has only minimal impact on new bone formation. Xenografts from bovine and porcine sources appear to have similar vital bone formation. Longer healing times prior to implant placement are associated with increased vital bone formation and decreased residual graft material. The most stable component in most studies is the percentage of CT/other. CONCLUSIONS: The percentage of vital bone and residual graft at ARP sites is dependent on the materials used and the length of healing time prior to obtaining core biopsies. KEY POINTS: What factors may affect the amount of new bone at the ARP site? At a time point about 4 months after ARP, the type of graft material used for ARP plays a large role in new bone formation. Studies focus on means and standard deviations, but patients often do not "follow the mean." Even if a single ARP protocol is used for all patients, there is great interindividual variability in new bone formation, and there is often variability between sites within a single patient. How long after ARP with an allograft should I wait to place an implant? Longer healing times such as 4-5 months generally provide higher amounts of vital bone formation than shorter healing times like 2-3 months. Differences in vital bone formation between ARP protocols tend to decrease with longer healing time. FDBA that contains demineralized bone, either alone or combined with mineralized FDBA, often provides higher amounts of new bone formation than 100% mineralized allograft, especially at shorter healing periods. Even a year after ARP with an allograft, residual graft material is often still present at the ARP site.

Subgingival scaling and root planing during minimally invasive periodontal surgery: A randomized controlled split-mouth trial.

BACKGROUND: The purpose of this randomized, controlled split-mouth study was to evaluate a videoscope as a visual adjunct to scaling and root planing when utilized in combination with minimally invasive surgery. METHODS: Twenty-five pairs (89 interproximal surfaces) of periodontally hopeless teeth planned for extraction were scaled and root planed with minimal surgical access using surgical loupes (control) or adjunctive use of a videoscope (test). Teeth were extracted with minimal trauma, stained with methylene blue, and photographed with a digital microscope for analysis. The primary outcome of residual calculus was calculated as a percentage of the total interproximal area of interest. Secondary outcomes included treatment time, as well as residual calculus according to probing depth, tooth location, and treatment date. Data were analyzed using Student's paired t-tests, two-way analyses of variance, and Spearman's correlation tests. RESULTS: Residual calculus area was 2.61% on control and 2.71% on test surfaces with no significant difference between groups. Subgroup analysis showed no difference in residual calculus between groups at moderate or deep sites. Treatment time per surface was significantly longer in the test group compared to the control group. Treatment order, tooth location, and operator experience did not significantly affect the primary outcome. CONCLUSIONS: Though the videoscope provided excellent visual access, it did not improve the efficacy of root planing for flat interproximal surfaces during minimally invasive periodontal surgery. Small amounts of calculus remain after instrumentation even with minimal surgical access and when root surfaces appear visually clean and tactilely smooth.

Donor site wound healing following free gingival graft surgery using platelet rich fibrin: A randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: The primary purpose of this two-arm, parallel design, randomized controlled study is to compare healing of the palatal tissue donor site when platelet-rich fibrin (PRF) is used as a wound dressing compared to the use of a hemostatic agent. Secondary outcomes of patient pain perception and analgesic intake were also evaluated. METHODS: Seventy-four patients receiving free gingival grafts were randomized to receive either PRF (test) or hemostatic agent (control) as a palatal wound dressing by patients selecting a sealed envelope containing their group assignment (initially 37 envelopes for PRF group and 37 for hemostatic agent group). Patient pain assessment and analgesic consumption were documented using a 21-point numerical scale (NMRS-21) at 24, 48, and 72 hours post-surgery. At 1-, 2-, 3-, and 4-week follow-up appointments palatal early healing index (PEHI) scores including wound color, epithelialization, presence or absence of swelling, granulation tissue, and bleeding on gentle palpation were generated by direct intraoral examination by a blinded examiner unaware of the patients' treatment group. RESULTS: NMRS-21 pain scores showed a significant reduction in pain over time in both groups, with no significant difference between groups at any time point. No significant between-group difference was found in the amount of analgesics taken by patients at 24, 48, and 72 hours. There was significant improvement in PEHI scores over the 4-week time period in both groups, but there was no significant difference in PEHI score at each time point (1, 2, 3, 4 weeks) between groups.  CONCLUSIONS: Study findings suggest that there is no difference in early palatal wound healing, patient pain perception, or analgesic consumption between use of PRF or a hemostatic agent as donor-site wound dressings.

Wound healing after ridge preservation: A randomized controlled trial on short-term (4 months) versus long-term (12 months) histologic outcomes.

BACKGROUND: The amount of time it takes for bone allograft particles to be replaced with new vital bone during ridge preservation is unclear. The purpose of this article was to compare the wound healing and vital bone formation following ridge preservation using a combination allograft of 70% mineralized and 30% demineralized freeze-dried bone allograft at 4 months (short-term, ST) versus 12 months (long-term, LT). METHODS: Fifty-seven patients were enrolled in the study who required extraction of a single tooth (excluding second and third molars) and were planned for replacement with a dental implant. After tooth extraction, all sites were grafted with a combination allograft procured from a single donor, and patients were randomized into the ST or LT healing groups. Patients returned for implant placement and an 8-mm bone core biopsy was harvested using a trephine drill during initial implant osteotomy preparation. The cores were then analyzed histologically to determine the percentages of vital bone formation, residual graft particles, and connective tissue/other. RESULTS: There was significantly greater vital bone formation in the LT group (51.38%) compared with the ST group (31.39%) (p = 0.0025) and significantly fewer residual graft particles in the LT group (18.04%) compared with the ST group (40.38%). CONCLUSIONS: A longer healing time following ridge preservation results in more vital bone formation and less residual graft particles at the time of implant placement. However, residual allograft material still remains at 12 months after ridge preservation.

A randomized controlled trial evaluating the effect of epithelial removal on free soft tissue autograft healing.

BACKGROUND: The purpose of this study is to determine if there is a difference in dimensional change of a free soft tissue autograft (FSTA) with epithelium compared to without epithelium. The secondary aim is to determine the patient and professional evaluation of color match and graft texture between the two groups. METHODS: Patients with ≤2 mm keratinized tissue indicated for a FSTA were randomly assigned to control group (FSTA with epithelium) or test group (de-epithelialized FSTA). The vertical and horizontal measurements of the grafts were taken at surgery, and 1, 3, and 6 months postoperatively. Patients were asked to evaluate the color match at each postoperative time point on a 21-step Numeric Rating Scale (NRS-21). Professional assessment of color match and graft texture were evaluated on images at the same time points. RESULTS: Forty-six patients and 55 grafts were included in the study. For change in graft height, width, and area, there were no significant differences between the treatment groups at any time point. Graft height and area in both groups decreased significantly from baseline to month 1 (p < .001), but no other difference was significant over time. When patients and professionals used the NRS-21 for evaluation of color match between the graft site and the surrounding soft tissue, there was no significant difference between the treatment groups. Similarly, evaluation of texture match on color images and black-and-white images revealed no significant differences between or within groups. CONCLUSION: De-epithelialized FSTA showed no difference in dimensional change or color and texture match compared to FSTA with epithelium.

Comparing the histological assessment following ridge preservation using a composite bovine-derived xenograft versus an alloplast hydroxyapatite-sugar cross-linked collagen matrix.

BACKGROUND: This randomized controlled trial was designed to evaluate the histological wound healing and alveolar ridge dimensional changes following ridge preservation using two different xenograft/collagen matrices. METHODS: Fifty-four patients each with non-molar teeth that required extraction and replacement with dental implants were enrolled. Teeth extractions were completed with minimal flap reflection and were randomized to receive ridge preservation with either 90% bovine-derived xenograft granules in a 10% porcine collagen matrix (Group A) or a sponge-like matrix of 80% microparticulate hydroxyapatite alloplast graft with 20% sugar cross-linked porcine type 1 collagen (Group B). After 16 weeks of healing and at the time of implant placement, a bone core biopsy was harvested followed by dental implant placement. The primary histological outcome evaluated were percentage of vital bone formation and connective tissue/other (fibrous tissue and marrow space). Secondary outcomes included the change in alveolar ridge width and the buccal and lingual ridge height. Statistical analysis was completed with two-sample t-test and Fisher exact test. RESULTS: Forty-four patients completed the study, 23 in group A and 21 in group B. Group B presented with statistically significantly (p = 0.02) more percentage of vital bone (39.3 ± 17.8) than group A (26.8 ± 15.8). No statistically significant difference was observed for changes in alveolar ridge dimensions. CONCLUSIONS: Group B, when used for ridge preservation, yields statistically significantly more vital bone over a 4-month healing period. Ridge dimension changes were similar between the two groups and were adequate for implant placement.

Long-term preservation of ridge dimension following tooth extraction and ridge preservation: A randomized controlled trial of healing at 4- and 12-month healing time points.

BACKGROUND: To date, the efficacy of ridge preservation in the maintenance of the residual alveolar ridge dimension beyond 6 months after treatment is unknown. The purpose of this study was to compare the differences in alveolar ridge dimensional change following ridge preservation between 4- and 12-month healing time points using cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT). METHODS: Fifty seven patients planned for tooth extraction and implant placement were enrolled. Following extraction, ridge preservation was performed. CBCT scans were taken within 72 hours following extraction with a customized resin stent containing a fixed radiographic marker. At either 4 months (short-term, ST group) or 12 months (long-term, LT group) after ridge preservation, patients had a second CBCT taken and an implant placed. Changes in ridge height and width were measured using the standardized radiographic marker. RESULTS: No significant differences were detected between the ST and LT groups in loss of buccal and lingual ridge height. Similarly, when adjusted for baseline ridge width, no significant differences were detected in ridge width loss at 3, 5, and 7 mm apical to the crest between the ST and LT groups. CONCLUSIONS: The efficacy of ridge preservation in the maintenance of ridge width and height at the 12-month time point is similar to that of the 4-month time point. Clinicians may feel confident that a delay in implant placement for up to a year has no significant negative impact on the height and width of the healed ridge.

Effect of intravenous dexamethasone on postoperative pain and swelling following periodontal flap surgery: A randomized controlled trial of patient-centered outcomes.

BACKGROUND: This randomized, crossover trial sought to determine if a preoperative intravenous (IV) dose of dexamethasone reduces pain, swelling, and analgesic usage following periodontal surgery. METHODS: Thirty-seven patients planned for two similar periodontal flap surgeries under IV sedation were enrolled. Patients were randomized to receive either 2 mL (8 mg) dexamethasone sodium phosphate or 2 mL of IV solution (placebo) before the first surgery, and 2 mL of the other solution before the second surgery. Postoperative discomfort was managed with a standardized regimen of 600 mg ibuprofen and 325 mg acetaminophen. A smartphone application was used to record self-assessed pain and swelling scores using 21-point numerical (NRS-21) and 4-point verbal (VRS-4) rating scales as well as the number of analgesic medications taken at 12-, 24-, 48-, 72-, 168-, and 336-hours following each surgery. RESULTS: IV dexamethasone was associated with a significant reduction in pain at 12, 24, 48, and 72 hours (P <0.05), and swelling at 12, 24, 48, and 168 hours (P < 0.05) postoperatively when compared with placebo based on NRS-21 responses. VRS-4 data showed significant reductions in pain at 12, 72, and 168 hours and swelling at 12, 24, and 168 hours postoperatively with dexamethasone. No significant differences were found in the number of tablets of ibuprofen or acetaminophen between dexamethasone and placebo surgeries. CONCLUSIONS: Preoperative, intravenously administered dexamethasone reduces pain and swelling within the first postoperative week following periodontal flap surgery and should be considered a useful adjunct for perioperative management.

American Academy of Periodontology best evidence consensus statement on the use of biologics in clinical practice.

A biologic is a therapeutic agent with biological activity that is administered to achieve an enhanced regenerative or reparative effect. The use of biologics has progressively become a core component of contemporary periodontal practice. However, some questions remain about their safety, indications, and effectiveness in specific clinical scenarios. Given their availability for routine clinical use and the existing amount of related evidence, the goal of this American Academy of Periodontology (AAP) best evidence consensus (BEC) was to provide a state-of-the-art, evidence-based perspective on the therapeutic application of autologous blood-derived products (ABPs), enamel matrix derivative (EMD), recombinant human platelet-derived growth factor BB (rhPDGF-BB), and recombinant human bone morphogenetic protein 2 (rhBMP-2). A panel of experts with extensive knowledge on the science and clinical application of biologics was convened. Three systematic reviews covering the areas of periodontal plastic surgery, treatment of infrabony defects, and alveolar ridge preservation/reconstruction and implant site development were conducted a priori and provided the foundation for the deliberations. The expert panel debated the merits of published data and exchanged experiential information to formulate evidence-based consensus statements and recommendations for clinical practice and future research. Based on an analysis of the current evidence and expert opinion, the panel concluded that the appropriate use of biologics in periodontal practice is generally safe and provides added benefits to conventional treatment approaches. However, therapeutic benefits and risks range based on the specific biologics used as well as patient-related local and systemic factors. Given the limited evidence available for some indications (e.g., gingival augmentation therapy, alveolar ridge preservation/reconstruction, and implant site development), future clinical studies that can expand the knowledge base on the clinical use of biologics in periodontal practice are warranted.

Impact of different surgical protocols on dimensional changes of free soft tissue autografts: A randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: To determine if there is a difference in the amount of shrinkage during healing of free soft tissue autografts (FSTAs) using different surgical techniques-suturing the vestibular flap margin apically to the base of the recipient bed versus leaving the flap margin free and unsutured. METHODS: Twenty-eight patients with mucogingival defects requiring FSTAs were recruited and enrolled in the study. Patients were randomized into test and control groups (14 per group) and received ≥1 FSTAs on non-molar mandibular teeth. In the test group the mucosal flap margin was sutured apically to the periosteum at the base of the graft; whereas, the mucosal flap margin in the control group was left free. Graft dimensional measurements were taken at time of surgery, then at 1, 3, and 6 months post-surgery. RESULTS: Thirty-five grafts were performed (15 test, 20 control). All FSTAs experienced vertical shrinkage after 6 months, but there was no significant difference (P = 0.51) in the mean amount of shrinkage after 6 months between the test (23.20% ± 20.88%) and control (21.10% ± 21.88%) groups. There was significantly greater horizontal shrinkage in the test (loss of 7.59% ± 10.20%) compared with the control (small gain of 0.32% ± 4.20%) group (P = 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: The findings suggest that there is similar vertical shrinkage when performing FSTA surgery when the mucosal flap margin is left free and unsutured when compared with leaving the flap margin free.

Accuracy of dental calculus detection using digital radiography and image manipulation.

BACKGROUND: The aim of this study was to determine if image enhancement improves a clinician's ability to identify the presence of calculus on digital radiographs. METHODS: Seventy-one hopeless teeth were collected from 34 patients. Teeth were stained with 1% methylene blue, the largest interproximal calculus deposit was scored, and photographs of each interproximal root surface were taken. The surface area of calculus deposit was determined as a percentage of the total interproximal root surface area. Digital radiographs of teeth taken before extraction were modified using the following enhancements: auto-contrast, emboss, invert, and sharpen. Radiographic presence of calculus was determined by two examiners. Sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), and negative predictive value (NPV) were calculated for each examiner and enhancement. A receiver operating characteristic curve was used to compare differences between the image enhancements in the detection of dental calculus. The kappa statistic was used to compare ratings between examiners. RESULTS: None of the enhanced images were statistically superior to original images in identifying radiographic calculus (P > 0.05). The average sensitivity of digital radiography was 50%, average specificity was 82.2%, PPV was 94%, and NPV 23.2%. A threshold of >30% of interproximal root surface covered with calculus and increasing size of deposits were associated with improved detection (P < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Digital enhancements do not significantly improve radiographic detection of dental calculus. As area of calculus on the root surface and size of calculus deposits increased, sensitivity of detection also increased.

Evaluation of healing at molar extraction sites with ridge preservation using a non-resorbable dense polytetrafluoroethylene membrane: A four-arm cohort prospective study.

OBJECTIVES: To examine ridge dimensional changes and histologic parameters of healing when ridge preservation (RP) was performed at molar sites using dense polytetrafluoroethylene (dPTFE) membrane alone, without a bone graft. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Eighteen patients had molar extraction and RP using dPTFE membrane alone. Ridge dimensions were measured using two standardized cone beam computerized tomography (CBCT) scans taken within 72 h and 3 months following extraction. Following a 3-month healing period, an implant osteotomy was prepared using a trephine drill and bone cores were collected for histological analysis. Four-arm analyses were performed using data from three previously published study arms of the same research group. RESULTS: There was a significant change in the buccal ridge height between the four groups at all aspects of the socket. Alveolar ridge width reduction at 3 mm from crest for all aspects (mesial, midpoint, distal) of the socket showed statistically significant difference for dPTFE alone group compared to the other three groups. Percentage of vital bone formation (62.10%) was significantly greater in dPTFE alone group compared to the other groups. CONCLUSIONS: RP using dPTFE membrane alone in molar sites with intact socket walls showed successful outcomes in maintaining ridge dimensions and in histologic wound healing.

Response of chronic and aggressive periodontitis to treatment.

Patients with aggressive periodontitis can be both rewarding and frustrating to treat in clinical practice. Interindividual variation in response to therapy can be widespread, and we do not clearly understand the reasons for this variable response. It is possible that new research into the resolution of inflammation may reveal basic differences between patients with chronic periodontitis and those with aggressive disease. In addition, future research involving modulation of host inflammatory responses may clarify the reasons for the differences in clinical outcomes between patients. We think it likely that this research could result in further alterations to the classification of periodontal diseases, as with more knowledge of the mechanisms of disease it is possible that patients currently classified as having aggressive periodontitis may be found not to represent a single diagnostic entity. Better understanding of the true nature of patients currently identified as having aggressive periodontitis may therefore lead to more effective treatment approaches.

A randomized controlled trial on the impact of healing time on wound healing following ridge preservation using a 70%/30% combination of mineralized and demineralized freeze-dried bone allograft.

BACKGROUND: To compare the histologic difference in healing between ridge preservation sites treated with a combination allograft of 70% mineralized and 30% demineralized freeze-dried bone allograft (FDBA) evaluated at 8 to 10 weeks versus 18 to 20 weeks post-extraction. Changes in morphological ridge dimensions were also evaluated. METHODS: Forty-four patients with a single-rooted tooth to be extracted and replaced by a dental implant were recruited for this study. At time of extraction, measurements were taken with a custom acrylic stent, and the extraction socket was grafted with the combination allograft and covered with a nonresorbable membrane. Patients were randomly assigned to the short-term (8 to 10 weeks) or long-term (18 to 20 weeks) healing group. Sites were re-entered for study measurements, a bone core sample, and implant placement. Bone cores obtained during implant placement were analyzed histologically to determine percentages of vital bone, residual graft, and CT/other. RESULTS: Thirty-eight of the 44 patients completed the study, 19 in each group. There was a significant difference between the two groups for mean percent vital bone formation (short-term = 18.17%, long-term = 40.32%, P = < 0.0001) and percentage of residual graft (short-term = 41.54%, long-term = 23.59%, P = < 0.0001). There was no difference in morphological changes between the two groups. CONCLUSION: Ridge preservation using combination FDBA resulted in approximately twice as much vital bone and half as much residual graft material after 18 to 20 weeks of healing compared to only 8 to 10 weeks healing.