No abstract

Background: The etiology of peri-implantitis is multifactorial, and it is not directly linked to the quantitative amount of plaque. The aim of this study was to evaluate the influence of subgingival microbiota around implants supporting full-arch restorations on clinical indexes of peri-implant health. Method: 47 patients (54 full-arch fixed rehabilitations) were included. Based on the highest value of probing depth (PD), 47 implants (in the test arch), 40 natural teeth and 7 implants (in the antagonist arch) were selected for microbiological sampling (traditional PCR and real-time PCR). Periodontal indexes (plaque index, PlI; probing depth, PD; bleeding on probing, BOP; peri-implant suppuration, PS) and marginal bone loss were also recorded. Results: Despite abundant plaque accumulation, the peri-implant parameters were within normal limits. No statistical difference was found in the microbial population around the test implants and antagonist natural teeth. Treponema denticola was present in a significantly higher amount around implants with increased PlI. Implants with increased BOP showed a significant increase in Treponema denticola and Tannerella forsythia. A significantly higher presence of Porphyromonas gingivalis, Treponema denticola and Tannerella forsythia was identified around the implants affected by peri-implantitis and in smokers. Conclusions: Peri-implantitis is characterized by a complex and polymicrobial disease, that might be influenced by the qualitative profile of plaque. Smoking might also favor implant biological complications in full-arch fixed prosthesis.

Objectives. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the primary stability of two implants with the same macro- and micromorphology but different thread design and analyze their clinical outcomes over a one-year period. Materials and Methods. 14 patients needing a partial rehabilitation with a delayed loading approach (DEL group: 9 patients) or a full-arch rehabilitation treated with immediately loaded fixed prostheses supported by 4 implants following the Columbus Bridge Protocol (CBP) (IL group: 5 patients) were included. In each patient, at least one SY (implant with standard threads) and one SL implant (implant with an augmented depth of the threads) were randomly inserted. Primary outcome measures were the number of threads exposed at a torque of 30 Ncm and 50 Ncm and final insertion torque. Secondary outcome measures were implant and prosthetic failure, peri-implant bone resorption, and periodontal parameters: bleeding on probing (BoP), plaque index (PI), and probing depth (PD) evaluated at 3, 6, and 12 months of healing. Results. Nineteen SY and 19 SL implants were inserted in 14 patients. Twenty implants (10 SL and 10 SY) were inserted in the IL group, while 18 (9 SL and 9 SY) were inserted in the DEL group and followed-up for 12 months. No patients dropped out. No implants and prostheses failed. No biological complications were identified. No significant differences were found between SY and SL implants comparing the number of exposed threads when inserting the implant with a torque insertion of 30 N (T student test p=.142 and U test p=.164). At 50 N, no threads were visible in either groups. Final torque insertion values were higher for SL (mean: 48.42 Ncm) compared to SY implants (mean: 43.42 Ncm) without a statistically significant difference. All the implants showed good clinical outcomes at the 1-year-in-function visit. Conclusions. After 12 months of function, both implant types provided good clinical outcomes without statistically significant differences between the two groups. A difference in insertion torque (even if not statistically significant) was found with higher insertion torque values for SL implants with a larger thread depth.

No abstract

This study aimed to compare a flapless surgical approach (FSA) with a traditional envelope flap (traditional approach (TA)). Every patient was treated with two approaches: TA and FSA. The primary outcome variables were both the discomfort during the post-operative convalescence and the correct final recovery of the impacted area. The secondary outcome variable was the average duration of the surgery. Post-operative pain and oedema were recorded. The measurements of soft tissue interface toward the distobuccal edge of the second molar were taken by periodontal probe before surgery (baseline) and 8 weeks after surgery. Statistical software was used to evaluate the data; a p-value < 0.05 was considered statistically significant. Twenty-four teeth of 12 patients (six Caucasian males and six Caucasian females, aged 23 ± 4 (17–30) years) with both lower impacted third molars (Ms3) were analysed. Considering an alpha error 0.05 that sample size allows power from 0.80 to 0.90, depending on the variable evaluated. Concerning attached gingiva, oedema and pain, the linear mixed model resulted in a statistically significant difference between the TA and FSA (p = 0.003; p < 0.01; and p = 0.018, respectively). Conversely, the model did not show a difference (p = 0.322) if pocket probing depth was considered. The FSA procedure was faster (p < 0.05) than the TA procedure (17 min and 8 s (± 6 s) vs. 28 min and 6 s (± 4 s), respectively). The results suggest that the FSA could be a suitable option for improving the surgical removal of lower Ms3. However, additional randomized controlled trial studies are necessary to confirm the reliability of our procedure and to verify its suitability in more complex Ms3 classifications.