Clinical, immunological and microbiological evaluation of experimental peri-implant mucositis and gingivitis in subjects with Grade C, stage III/IV periodontitis background.

AIM: To compare individuals with a periodontitis background (Grade C, stage III/IV-formerly generalized aggressive periodontitis) (H-GAP) with periodontally healthy subjects (H-Health) in terms of molecular changes (immunological/microbiological) accompanying experimental peri-implant mucositis and gingivitis. MATERIALS AND METHODS: H-GAP and control (H-Health) subjects were recruited, and experimental mucositis/gingivitis was induced around a single screw-retained implant and one contralateral tooth. Participants refrained from oral hygiene for 21 days in the selected areas, followed by professional prophylaxis and hygiene instructions for 21 days. Clinical parameters, immunological markers (multiplex analysis) and microbial data (16S rRNA gene sequencing) were collected at baseline, during induction (7, 14 and 21 days) and following remission (42 days). RESULTS: Clinically, no significant differences were observed between the groups (n = 10/each group) (H-GAP vs. H-Health) (p > .05, Mann-Whitney test) and the type of site (tooth vs. implant) (p > .05, Wilcoxon test) at the time of onset and resolution, or severity of gingival/mucosal inflammation. H-GAP displayed lower concentrations of the cytokines interleukin (IL)-1B, IL-4, IL-17, tumor necrosis factor-α and interferon-γ around implants than H-Health at baseline and during induction of mucositis (p < .05, Mann-Whitney test). In both groups, implants showed significantly higher inflammatory background at baseline and all subsequent visits when compared with teeth (p < .05, Wilcoxon test). Alpha and ß-diversity metrics showed a significant shift in the microbiome composition and abundances of core species during induction and resolution of peri-implant mucositis and gingivitis (p < .05, restricted maximum likelihood method of Shannon and Bray-Curtis indices, respectively). Differences were not significant for these parameters between the H-Health and H-GAP groups when the periodontal and peri-implant microbiomes were compared separately; however, at each time point, the peri-implant microbiome differed significantly from the periodontal microbiome. CONCLUSIONS: Within the limitations of this pilot study (e.g. low power), it can be concluded that different microbial shifts contribute to the onset and progression of inflammatory responses around teeth and implants and that history of periodontal disease experience plays an additional role in modulating the immune response of peri-implant and periodontal tissues to biofilm accumulation.

Treatment of dehiscence-type defects with collagen matrix and/or enamel matrix derivative: Histomorphometric study in minipigs.

BACKGROUND: This study aimed to evaluate, histomorphometrically, the use of collagen matrix (CM) and/or enamel matrix derivative (EMD) for the treatment of dehiscence-type recession defects in minipigs. METHODS: Eight healthy, male, young BR-1 minipigs, with no periodontal disease were treated. Bilateral dehiscence-type defects were surgically created on the buccal of the mandibular premolars (PI and PII). After 30 days, the defects were randomly assigned to four groups: coronally advanced flap (CAF); CAF + CM; CAF + EMD; and CAF + CM + EMD (split-mouth design). The evaluated parameters (mm): total defect length; new cementum (NC); new bone (NB); gingival margin position; total epithelium length; epithelium on the root; connective tissue adaptation; and soft tissue thickness (STT). RESULTS: The EMD-treated groups showed a superior length of NC [4.13 ± 1.22 (CAF + EMD); 3.95 ± 1.11 (CAF + CM + EMD); 2.94 ± 0.77 (CAF + CM); 2.72 ± 0.81 (CAF), P = 0.02] and NB [3.21 ± 0.68 (CAF + CM + EMD); 3.01 ± 0.56 (CAF + EMD); 2.15 ± 0.47 (CAF + CM); 2.29 ± 0.82 (CAF), P = 0.005]. The CAF and CAF + CM groups showed a superior epithelial length when compared to EMD-treated groups after 3 months. A superior STT was observed for CAF + CM + EMD group (1.5 ± 0.33) when compared with the other groups [1.09 ± 0.26 (CAF + EMD); 1.04 ± 0.34 (CAF + CM); and 1.14 ± 0.29 (CAF), P = 0.03]. CONCLUSION(S): The results of the present study indicate that EMD application, irrespective of the combination with CM, may improve the periodontal regeneration of dehiscence-type defects in this animal model.

Does enamel matrix derivative application improve clinical outcomes after semilunar flap surgery? A randomized clinical trial.

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the treatment of gingival recessions by semilunar coronally positioned flap plus enamel matrix derivative (SCPF + EMD). MATERIALS AND METHODS: Thirty patients with class I localized gingival recession were included. They were randomly allocated in two groups: SCPF + EMD and SCPF. Recession height (RH), recession width (RW), width of keratinized tissue (WKT), thickness of keratinized tissue (TKT), probing depth (PD), and clinical attachment level (CAL) were measured at baseline, 6 and 12 months post-surgery. Patient/professional evaluation of esthetics and root sensitivity was performed. RESULTS: After 12 months, mean root coverage was 1.98 ± 0.33 mm for SCPF + EMD (90.86 ± 14.69%) and 1.85 ± 0.41 mm (79.76 ± 17.44%) for SCPF (p > 0.05). The esthetic evaluation by the patient showed preference for SCPF + EMD. According to the professional evaluation (QCE), the use of EMD decreases the appearance of postoperative scar tissue line. There was a significant reduction in root hypersensitivity with no further complaints by the patients. CONCLUSIONS: The addition of EMD provides significantly better esthetics to SCPF, according to patient and professional assessments. SCPF + EMD is effective but not superior to SCPF for root coverage, after 12 months. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Previous clinical trials showed that the combination of EMD with coronally advanced flaps may enhance the outcome of root coverage. There is a lack of studies testing the combination of EMD with SCPF. The combination SCPF + EMD provides better esthetics when compared to the SCPF and is effective, but not superior, to SCPF for root coverage, after 12 months. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT02459704.

Xenogenous Collagen Matrix and/or Enamel Matrix Derivative for Treatment of Localized Gingival Recessions: A Randomized Clinical Trial. Part II: Patient-Reported Outcomes.

BACKGROUND: Gingival recession (GR) might be associated with patient discomfort due to cervical dentin hypersensitivity (CDH) and esthetic dissatisfaction. The aim is to evaluate the effect of root coverage procedure with a xenogenous collagen matrix (CM) and/or enamel matrix derivative (EMD) in combination with a coronally advanced flap (CAF) on CDH, esthetics, and oral health-related quality of life (OHRQoL) of patients with GR. METHODS: Sixty-eight participants with single Miller Class I/II GRs were treated with CAF (n = 17), CAF + CM (n = 17), CAF + EMD (n = 17), and CAF + CM + EMD (n = 17). CDH was assessed by evaporative stimuli using a visual analog scale (VAS) and a Schiff scale. Esthetics outcome was assessed with VAS and the Questionnaire of Oral Esthetic Satisfaction. Oral Health Impact Profile-14 (OHIP-14) questionnaire was used to assess OHRQoL. All parameters were evaluated at baseline and after 6 months. RESULTS: Intragroup analysis showed statistically significant reduction in CDH and esthetic dissatisfaction with no intergroup significant differences (P >0.05). The impact of oral health on QoL after 6 months was significant for CAF + CM, CAF + EMD, and CAF + CM + EMD (P <0.05). Total OHIP-14 score and psychologic discomfort, psychologic disability, social disability, and handicap dimensions showed negative correlation with esthetics. OHIP-14 physical pain dimension had positive correlation with CDH (P <0.05). OHIP-14 showed no correlation with percentage of root coverage, keratinized tissue width, or keratinized tissue thickness (P >0.05). CONCLUSION: Root coverage procedures improve patient OHRQoL by impacting on a wide range of dimensions, perceived after reduction of CDH and esthetic dissatisfaction of patients with GRs treated with CAF + CM, CAF + EMD, and CAF + CM + EMD.

Xenogenous Collagen Matrix and/or Enamel Matrix Derivative for Treatment of Localized Gingival Recessions: A Randomized Clinical Trial. Part I: Clinical Outcomes.

BACKGROUND: Considering xenogeneic collagen matrix (CM) and enamel matrix derivative (EMD) characteristics, it is suggested that their combination could promote superior clinical outcomes in root coverage procedures. Thus, the aim of this parallel, double-masked, dual-center, randomized clinical trial is to evaluate clinical outcomes after treatment of localized gingival recession (GR) by a coronally advanced flap (CAF) combined with CM and/or EMD. METHODS: Sixty-eight patients presenting one Miller Class I or II GRs were randomly assigned to receive either CAF (n = 17); CAF + CM (n = 17); CAF + EMD (n = 17), or CAF + CM + EMD (n = 17). Recession height, probing depth, clinical attachment level, and keratinized tissue width and thickness were measured at baseline and 90 days and 6 months after surgery. RESULTS: The obtained root coverage was 68.04% ± 24.11% for CAF; 87.20% ± 15.01% for CAF + CM; 88.77% ± 20.66% for CAF + EMD; and 91.59% ± 11.08% for CAF + CM + EMD after 6 months. Groups that received biomaterials showed greater values (P <0.05). Complete root coverage (CRC) for CAF + EMD was 70.59%, significantly superior to CAF alone (23.53%); CAF + CM (52.94%), and CAF + CM + EMD (51.47%) (P <0.05). Keratinized tissue thickness gain was significant only in CM-treated groups (P <0.05). CONCLUSIONS: The three approaches are superior to CAF alone for root coverage. EMD provides highest levels of CRC; however, the addition of CM increases gingival thickness. The combination approach does not seem justified.

Dentin hypersensitivity reduction using an arginine-based approach after non-surgical periodontal treatment.

PURPOSE: To determine the efficacy of two oral hygiene regimens in the reduction of dentin hypersensitivity (DH) on subjects undergoing non-surgical periodontal treatment (NST), over a period of 8 weeks. METHODS: 60 subjects that were randomly assigned to: Test group - NST followed in-office application of an arginine-based professional paste and toothbrushing with arginine-based toothpaste at home (n= 30) and Control group - NST followed in-office application of a fluoride-free prophylaxis paste and toothbrushing with a toothpaste based on sodium monofluorophosphate 0.76%, at home (n= 30). Air blast sensitivity assessments were made using the Schiff scale. The sensitivity parameters were measured at baseline, 1, 4 and 8 weeks. RESULTS: After 1 week, DH reduction was statistically significant for the test group (63.6%) compared to baseline, while no significant reduction was observed for the Control group (4.8%). After 4-8 weeks, the reductions were 81.6%/86.3% for the test group and 9.5%/14.2% for the Control group. When comparing the two groups, the test group showed a superior DH reduction in all evaluation periods (P< 0.05). Within the limits of the present study, it was concluded that the test oral hygiene regimen can effectively reduce dentin hypersensitivity during the most critical period after non-surgical periodontal treatment (up to 8 weeks). CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE: The arginine-based approach provided significantly greater dentin hypersensitivity (DH) relief after non-surgical periodontal treatment (NST) when compared to the control. The combination of the in-office paste application with the daily used toothpaste may be a useful tool to reduce DH, an unpleasant and common condition that affects a large number of subjects, particularly during the initial weeks following NST.