Libros

Following implant placement, a soft tissue barrier will form at the healing abutment connection called peri-implant mucosa. The dimension of this anatomical structure seems to play a key role in maintaining long-term peri-implant and marginal bone level stability. In its early stages, soft tissue healing is a process involving many cellular and molecular events. Enamel matrix derivative (EMD) may improve and accelerate soft tissue wound healing and inflammatory resolution. In the present split-mouth randomized clinical trial, EMD was used to influence the early phase of soft tissue healing around dental implants placed with a single-stage approach into a completely healed ridge. A total of 60 implants were placed in 30 patients (2 implants per patient, one in the test group and one in the control group). In the test sites, EMD was administered around the healing abutment before soft tissues were sutured. Soft tissue healing index (HI) and secondary endpoints (clinical, radiographic, and patientreported outcomes) were measured. Better outcomes were recorded in patients receiving EMD for all parameters. The present results support the use of EMD to improve and accelerate soft tissue wound healing around implants.

A fully tapered implant was recently introduced to increase primary stability and to be used in challenging situations. Twenty single implants were inserted in maxillary postextraction sockets, from premolar to premolar, and immediately restored. Marginal bone level (MBL) and probing depth (PD) were evaluated over a 12-month follow-up period. All implants osseointegrated, achieving a success rate of 100%. The difference in MBL between implant placement and 1 year later was 0.20 ± 0.04 mm, while PD was 2.82 ± 0.51 mm at 1 year. The data reported here support the use of a fully tapered implant for immediate placement and immediate provisionalization for single-tooth replacements in the esthetic area.

This study evaluated the radiographic alterations that occur in immediate postextraction implants and in delayed implants inserted in a preserved ridge. In group A, an implant was placed immediately after tooth extraction, grafting the bone-to-implant gap. In group B, alveolar ridge preservation was performed after tooth extraction, and delayed implant placement was performed 4 months later. The final follow-up was 1 year after prosthetic loading in both groups. The marginal bone level (MBL) was measured at implant insertion (T1), at loading (T2), and at the final follow-up, 12 months after prosthetic loading (T3). At tooth extraction (T0) and T3, the horizontal ridge width (HW) was measured on CBCT scans at three different levels. No statistically significant differences in MBL or HW were found between the two study groups. The outcomes suggest that it is possible to maintain MBL and alveolar bone volumes regardless of whether the procedure is performed through immediate postextraction implant placement or through delayed implant placement in a preserved ridge.

Soft tissue changes were evaluated over a period of 1 year in 48 patients who required extraction of a single tooth in the anterior maxillary arch (premolar to premolar) and its replacement with an implant. The patients were randomly divided into two groups: In group A, an immediate postextraction implant was placed, and the bone-to-implant gap was filled with bovine bone mineral; in group B, the alveolar ridge preservation technique was performed after extraction, and the implant was placed 4 months later. On the day of tooth extraction (T0) and 1 year after tooth extraction (T1), the soft tissue horizontal width, mesial and distal papillary levels, midfacial gingival level, and Pink Esthetic Score were evaluated in both groups. No significant differences were observed between the groups in any of the considered parameters. Statistically significant differences were found in the soft tissue horizontal width between T0 and T1. The clinical results of the two procedures were similar and comparable over time. When evaluating the stability of the soft tissue contour, and considering the specific indications of the two techniques, it is possible to choose either an immediate implant or an alveolar ridge preservation technique with staged placement.

Ten patients with a diagnosis of generalized chronic periodontitis underwent nonsurgical periodontal therapy performed with the exclusive use of ultrasonic instrumentation and air polishing with erythritol powder. For each patient, four pockets with probing depths (PDs) of 4 to 10 mm were selected as experimental sites, and air polishing was performed either before (Group A) or after (Group B) ultrasonic scaling. PDs and clinical attachment levels significantly improved over a 12-month observation period. No significant difference was observed between the use of air polishing before or after ultrasonic instrumentation. The present clinical protocols could represent a suitable treatment for cause-related periodontal therapy.

The purpose of this randomized clinical study was to evaluate the efficacy of platform-switching (PS) vs platform-matching (PM) implants when paired with a newly designed marginless abutment (MA) vs a conventional abutment (CA) in maintaining peri-implant tissue stability. Marginal bone level (MBL) and probing depth were measured up to 1 year postloading. Eighty implants were inserted in 42 patients and randomly assigned to one of four groups, each with a different implant/abutment configuration: Group 1 (PM+CA), Group 2 (PM+MA), Group 3 (PS+CA), and Group 4 (PS+MA). Data were collected at implant placement (T0), abutment placement (T1), final crown placement (T2), and 1 year postloading (T3). At the 1-year follow-up, MBL was more stable in Groups 3 and 4 compared to Groups 1 and 2. These results suggest that the role played by the implant-abutment connection (PS vs PM) is more important than the type of abutment preparation (MA vs CA).

A postextraction socket is always open to different treatment possibilities. A straightforward clinical classification may help evaluate which surgical approach is best suited for the case being treated. Four different classes are defined on the basis of the local anatomy of the site, available bone volume, and soft tissue level. For every clinical situation, either immediate placement, early placement, alveolar ridge preservation, or staged approach can be selected as a treatment modality according to the classifications listed.

Purpose: No information is available on the perception of the quality of care in patients treated for periodontitis. The purpose of this article was to assess how periodontitis-affected patients perceive the quality of periodontal treatment (PT) and to measure the factors which may influence it. Materials and Methods: 306 subjects who completed PT were invited to participate. Questionnaires and visual analogic scales (VAS) evaluating perception of quality of care, symptoms, and oral health related quality of life (OHRQoL) were handed out. Oral and periodontal indicators were collected before and after treatment. The impact of different factors on perception of quality was assessed with a regression model. Results: Quality evaluation was high yet unrelated for both patients and clinicians (p = 0.983). Quality was negatively influenced by the number of residual oral infections (p 0.001), patient's age (p = 0.07) and presence of residual pain at completion of PT (p = 0.02). Professionalism, kindness of the staff and communication skills were the characteristics mostly appreciated. The OHRQoL was influenced by the number of residual teeth (p 0.001), increasing age of patients (p = 0.08), number of residual infections (p 0.01) and pain (p = 0.04). Conclusions: Patients' quality perception appeared to be influenced by clinical and emotional aspects. Oral care providers should be aware of the impact of non-clinical factors in patients' appreciation of quality of treatment. Palabras clave: oral health related quality of life, periodontitis, quality of care

Soft tissue contour changes were evaluated in 20 patients who underwent immediate implant placement with provisional restoration. The bone-to-implant gap was accurately grafted with xenograft prior to implant placement, and enamel matrix derivative was applied prior to delivery of an immediate screw-retained restoration. No significant differences were observed between baseline and 1 year after implant placement in soft tissue contour measurements and the Pink Esthetic Score. Furthermore, no differences were observed between thin or thick biotypes. It was shown that the use of immediate single-tooth implants with immediate restoration resulted in the maintenance of the soft tissue contour and esthetics when compared to pretreatment independently from the soft tissue phenotype.

Immediate implant placement may represent a possible treatment plan for single tooth restoration. This study evaluated the insertion of osseointegrated implants in intact fresh extraction sockets in the anterior maxilla. The bone-toimplant gap was accurately grafted with a bovine bone mineral prior to implant engagement, and an immediate screw-retained restoration was delivered. After 3 months, the provisional crown was replaced with the definitive ceramic crown. Marginal bone levels remained stable after 1 year. The horizontal ridge dimension was also evaluated at three levels using CBCT scans after 1 year. The horizontal width of the postextraction crest was well preserved independently from the thickness of the buccal bone plate at baseline.