The outcome of implant therapy in terms of survival rate and marginal bone loss is considered very important for the clinician in decision making when placing implants in patients with a history of aggressive periodontitis.

While periodontitis deteriorates patients’ quality of life, non-surgical periodontal treatment seems to offer an improvement. The purpose of the present study was to evaluate the impact of non-surgical and surgical periodontal treatment on the oral health-related quality of life (OHRQoL) utilizing patient-centered assessments and surrogate clinical measurements in Greek adults. Eighty-three individuals with chronic periodontitis were enrolled in the study. Assessment of OHRQoL with the use of the Oral Health Impact Profile (OHIP-14) questionnaire in conjunction with clinical measurements of pocket probing depth (PPD), plaque index (PI) and bleeding on probing (BOP) were performed at baseline (t0), after non-surgical therapy (t1) and after periodontal surgery (t2). A statistically significant reduction of OHIP-14 score was recorded at t1 and t2 examination compared to baseline (p < 0.001) and a statistically significant improvement in all clinical parameter at all time points was recorded (p < 0.05). No correlation between the clinical parameters and the total score of OHIP-14 was recorded at any time point. Non-surgical periodontal treatment seemed to improve OHRQoL in terms of OHIP-14 scores, whilst supplementary surgical periodontal therapy did not offer any additional benefit. No correlation was found between patients’ perception of quality of life expressed by OHIP-14 score and the surrogate clinical parameters.

Background:Exodontia (dental extraction), being the most frequent minor surgical procedure in the general population, inevitably involves a large number of patients on antithrombotic medication. Current experience shows that there is a degree of confusion in managing these patients.Description:Post-exodontia bleeding, a natural consequence of every dental extraction with no or minor clinical significance in the vast majority of cases, often appears to be of major concern to both patients and healthcare practitioners (dentists or physicians), either because of the alarming nature of oral bleeding itself or because of the distorted perception about its importance. These concerns are enhanced by the lack of a universal standardized definition of post-exodontia bleeding and by the fact that all currently available post-exodontia bleeding definitions bear intrinsic limitations and tend to overestimate its clinical significance.Conclusion:In order to overcome the aforementioned issues, this article presents an overview of post-extraction bleeding and proposes a classification, based on the well-recognized Bleeding Academic Research Consortium (BARC) bleeding definition, aiming at reducing heterogeneity in this field.

No abstract

No abstract