Diagnosis and treatment planning for periodontal disease are fraught with challenges because of the complex and multifactorial nature of the disease as well as the inherent variability in interpretation of clinical findings. It is important for all practitioners to be accurate and consistent in formulating diagnoses based on the American Academy of Periodontology classification guidelines and to implement treatment plans to adequately address patients' needs. The aim of this study was to compare diagnoses and treatment plans among four groups of participants: full-time and part-time periodontology faculty at Indiana University School of Dentistry (IUSD), full-time and part-time IUSD general practice faculty, full-time periodontists in private practice, and full-time general practitioners in private practice. The study, conducted September 2016 to February 2017, also sought to determine if the calibrated participants had more correct diagnoses and treatment plans than those who had not received calibration training. Each of the four groups had 20 participants each. Participants evaluated ten de-identified case records and selected a diagnosis and treatment plan for each case. In the results, the 20 IUSD periodontal faculty members, most of whom had participated in calibration sessions, had overall better agreement and more correct responses for diagnoses and treatment plans than the IUSD general practice faculty members, private practice general practitioners, and private practice periodontists (only one of those 60 participants had participated in calibration sessions). The results supported the notion that periodic calibration is needed to standardize faculty criteria, facilitate better agreement and accuracy, and enhance consistency in the use of clinical criteria during training for dental students and in practice.

Dental implant supported restorations have been added substantially to the clinical treatment options presented to patients. However, complications with these treatment options also arise due to improper patient selection and inadequate treatment planning combined with poor follow-up care. The complications related to the presence of inflammation include perimucositis, peri-implant bone loss, and peri-implantitis. Prevalence rates of these complications have been reported to be as high as 56%. Treatment options that have been reported include nonsurgical therapy, the use of locally delivered and systemically delivered antibiotics, and surgical protocols aimed at regenerating the lost bone and soft tissue around the implants. The aim of this article is to report on three cases and review some of the treatment options used in their management.

IntroductionVerruciform xanthoma is an uncommon, benign, asymptomatic lesion commonly affecting the attached tissues in the oral cavity, especially the gingiva. Clinical presentation can be variable and requires biopsy to confirm the diagnosis.Case SeriesTwo cases of verruciform xanthoma in a 21‐year‐old male and a 46‐year‐old female are reported, emphasizing the need for thorough comprehensive analysis of all oral lesions. The clinical features, differential diagnoses, typical and atypical histological features, and potential etiology are presented.ConclusionsVerruciform xanthoma should be considered in the differential diagnosis of solitary lesions in the oral cavity with a papillary, granular, or verrucous surface texture, and confirmed with histopathological examination. Continued monitoring for recurrence at routine examination is necessary especially in sites where the lesion may not have been completely excised.