Full-Mouth Rehabilitation with Calvarium Bone Grafts and Dental Implants for a Papillon-Lefèvre Syndrome Patient: Case Report.

Papillon-Lefèvre syndrome (PLS) is a rare autosomal recessive disorder of keratinization associated with palmoplantar keratoderma and severe periodontitis resulting in complete edentulism in late adolescence. The pathognomonic dental features of PLS are pathologic migration, hypermobility, and exfoliation of the teeth without any signs of root resorption. It has been suggested that an effective way to treat PLS patients presenting early in the disease progression is extraction of the erupted primary dentition or hopeless permanent teeth followed by antibiotic coverage with periodontal therapy for the remaining teeth. Unfortunately, studies have shown that this regimen only temporarily delays the progression of periodontal disease and does not prevent further tooth loss and bone destruction in the long term. Post-tooth loss, atrophic ridges make conventional prosthodontic rehabilitation quite challenging, and more recently, implant-supported prostheses have been considered as a viable alternative. In a PLS patient, implant placement is complicated by inadequate bone volume; thus, bone augmentation techniques or the use of short implants is often considered. When large volumes of bone are required, parietal calvarium bone can be used to predictably reconstruct severe defects. A PLS patient aged 21 years presented a chief complaint of ill-fitting conventional complete dentures. The patient had severely atrophic ridges, requiring significant bone augmentation for an implant-supported prosthesis. The present case is the first example of bone augmentation using autogenous calvarium parietal graft followed by endosseous implant placement and prosthetic restoration in a PLS patient.

Soft Tissue Changes Around Immediately Placed Implants: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analyses With at Least 12 Months of Follow-Up After Functional Loading.

BACKGROUND: Immediate implant placement (IIP) is predictable but can lead to esthetic challenges, including midfacial recession (MFR) and papillary height (PH) loss. The aim of this systematic review is to examine the effect of IIP on MFR and PH after at least 12 months of functional loading. METHODS: Literature review of the Cochrane and MEDLINE electronic databases and hand search up to January 2016 identified eligible studies. Four reviewers independently assessed data quality and methodology. RESULTS: A total of 106 articles satisfied the inclusion criteria. Twelve studies qualified for three meta-analyses. MFR was slightly less in conventional implant placement (CIP) than in IIP, but the result was not statistically significant (mean difference [MD] -0.064 mm; P = 0.687). Similarly, there was better PH maintenance in CIPs, with statistical significance for distal PH (DPH) only (cumulative PH: MD -0.396, P = 0.010; DPH: MD -0.765, P <0.001; mesial PH [MPH]: MD -0.285, P = 0.256). MFR was slightly less in IIP with thick versus thin biotypes, but not statistically significantly different (MD -0.373, P = 0.243). Pooled data showed statistically significantly less MFR and better PH maintenance in IIP with thick biotype (MFR: MD -0.478, P <0.001; cumulative PH: MD -0.287, P <0.001; MPH: MD -0.288, P <0.001; DPH: MD -0.310, P <0.001). Non-significantly less MFR (MD 0.253, P = 0.384) and significantly better PH maintenance were found in IIP with immediate provisionalization versus conventional restoration (MD -0.519, P = 0.028). CONCLUSIONS: IIP in thick biotype and with immediate provisionalization had less MFR and better PH than IIP in thin biotype or with delayed restoration. However, these findings should be interpreted with caution due to high heterogeneity, which was calculated using comprehensive meta-analysis statistical software that took into account sample size and different treatment groups, and limited qualified studies.