Aim To review the dental literature in terms of efficacy of soft tissue augmentation procedures around dental implants and in partially edentulous sites. Methods A Medline search was performed for human studies augmenting keratinized mucosa (KM) and soft tissue volume around implants and in partially edentulous areas. Due to heterogeneity in between the studies, no meta‐analyses could be performed. Results Nine (KM) and eleven (volume) studies met the inclusion criteria. An apically positioned flap/vestibuloplasty (APF/V) plus a graft material [free gingival graft (FGG)/subepithelial connective tissue graft (SCTG)/collagen matrix (CM)] resulted in an increase of keratinized tissue (1.4–3.3 mm). Statistically significantly better outcomes were obtained for APF/V plus FGG/SCTG compared with controls (APF/V alone; no treatment) (p < 0.05). For surgery time and patient morbidity, statistically significantly more favourable outcomes were reported for CM compared to SCTGs (p < 0.05) in two randomized controlled clinical trials (RCTs), even though rendering less keratinized tissue. SCTGs were the best‐documented method for gain of soft tissue volume at implant sites and partially edentulous sites. Aesthetically at immediate implant sites, better papilla fill and higher marginal mucosal levels were obtained using SCTGs compared to non‐grafted sites. Conclusions An APF/V plus FGG/SCTG was the best‐documented and most successful method to increase the width of KM. APF/V plus CM demonstrated less gain in KM, but also less patient morbidity and surgery time compared to APF/V plus SCTG based on two RCTs. Autogenous grafts (SCTG) rendered an increase in soft tissue thickness and better aesthetics compared to non‐grafted sites.

No abstract

There have been considerable recent technological developments for implant overdenture attachments. This study presents an overview of the biomechanical and biomolecular aspects of various attachments for implant overdenture. Available articles on attachments for implant overdenture were reviewed from January 1980 to August 2021 in the ScienceDirect, MEDLINE/PubMed, and Web of Science resources, and relevant studies were included in this study. We focused on the following topics: attachment systems, retention of various attachments, stress distribution with different attachments, the design and fabrication of attachments, digital techniques in overdenture attachments, and the effects of attachments in peri-implant health. We found that plastic resin is commonly used for ball and bar attachments, whereas nylon resin is commonly used in locator attachments. The locator system offers a valuable attachment option for implant-retained overdenture. Attachment retention reduces while lateral force increases with implant inclination in overdenture. The higher the retention of an overdenture attachment, the higher the transferred stresses. Additionally, clip loading produces more stress in implants and precision elements than bar-retained dentures. As such, we conclude that the ball and locator systems the best overdenture systems due to their superior tissue response, survival rate, and patient satisfaction.

Background:The purpose of this 2-year prospective survival analysis study is to determine a statistically validated periodontal prognostic score for diseased molars in smokers using the Miller-McEntire Periodontal Prognostic Index (MMPPI).Materials and Methods:Two hundred molars were evaluated from 25 patients who were smokers with moderate-to-severe chronic periodontitis. The factors evaluated included age, probing depth, mobility, furcation involvement, smoking, and molar type. A modified, 5 level, scoring criterion for smoking based on smoking-dose was adopted. MMPPI was computed as the sum of scores for all six prognostic factors. Appropriate periodontal treatment and supportive periodontal therapy were provided. All patients were evaluated at baseline and 2 years posttreatment. Hazard risk ratio (HR) was computed for each prognostic factor.Results:A total of 3 (1.5%) teeth of the 200 molars were extracted over the 2-year follow-up duration, with a mean of 0.015 teeth lost. The HR was found as significantly higher for three individual prognostic factors: mobility (HR = 5.57, P = 0.02), smoking (HR = 3.35, P = 0.04), and furcation involvement (HR = 7.30, P = 0.01). Significant and positive HR (HR = 1.70, P = 0.01) was noted for the total MMPPI score, validating its prognostic value for molar survival at 2 years prospectively.Conclusions:The findings of the current study demonstrate the prognostic validity of MMPPI incorporating a more detailed smoking score criterion. The factors smoking, furcation involvement, and mobility significantly impacted the likelihood of survival of periodontally diseased molars. Further studies with a larger sample size and longer follow-up are required to confirm these findings.

Aim and Objective:The aim of this study was to prospectively determine and establish the periodontal prognosis of diseased molars in diabetic patients using the Miller–McEntire Periodontal Prognostic Index (MMPPI) with an additional criterion for diabetes (changes in glycosylated hemoglobin levels), at 2-year postperiodontal therapy.Materials and Methods:A sample of 200 molars in 25 patients with diabetes mellitus (DM) and chronic periodontitis were evaluated. The prognostic parameters evaluated include age, probing depth (PD), mobility, furcation involvement, diabetes, and molar type. The total score calculated from all parameters was used considered prognosis score for each molar. All patients were evaluated at baseline and 2-year posttreatment.Results:The results of this study suggest that following prognostic factors, DM (hazard ratio [HR] =5.2), age (HR = 0.4), and molar type (HR = 0.6) were clinically significant at the end of the 2-year posttherapy from baseline. A total of 4 (2%) teeth were extracted from the 200 teeth with a mean of 0.02 for the tooth lost during 2-year posttreatment. Significant improvements (P < 0.05) in the frequency PD, furcation, and mobility scores were noted at 2 years.Conclusions:These findings demonstrate that score for DM as prognostic criterion is a valid addition to MMPPI. The factors such as DM, age, and molar type can impact the prognosis of molar survival. Studies with a larger sample size and longer follow-up are required to affirm the findings of this preliminary study.