Clinical and Radiographic Evaluation of OsseoSpeed EV Implants.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the survival rate (primary outcome) and the marginal bone loss (secondary outcome) of the OsseoSpeed EV Implants (Astra Tech Implant System, Dentsply Sirona Implants; hereinafter EV implants) used in a wide range of clinical scenarios and followed up to 8 years in a nonuniversity setting. MATERIALS AND METHODS: All EV implants consecutively placed from 2013 to 2021 in a private dental clinic were included, and medical and radiologic records were retrospectively investigated. Independent reviewers collected 11 data types as potential influencing variables and measured the mesial and distal marginal bone levels to the nearest 0.5 mm on available radiographs, either panoramic or periapical. Tables of descriptive statistics were made at implant and patient levels. Univariate and multiple Cox regression models were adjusted for clustering effects and determined the hazard ratio (HR) and odds ratio (OR) for each independent variable collected. RESULTS: The study sample consisted of 597 EV implants and 235 patients. During a mean follow-up of 42.1 ± 23 months (range: 10 to 94 months), 44 implants were lost (7.4%)-34 early (5.7%) and 10 late (1.7%)-in 38 patients (16.1%). The overall survival rate (SR) was 92.6% (CI: 90.5% to 94.7%), and the proportion of patients with all their implants surviving was 83.8% (CI: 79.1% to 88.5%). At the end of the study, the probability of survival of an implant that did not fail early was 98.2% (CI: 97.1% to 99.3%). Implant-level analysis identified two significant variables: implant diameter (HR 0.37, P = .009**) and immediate postextraction placement (HR 2.35, P = .025*). At the patient level, bruxism (OR = 3.29; P = .009**), history of periodontitis (OR = 2.18, P = .030*), and the number of implants placed (OR = 1.43; P = .001**) were found to be statistically significant. After removing dropouts and early failures from a sample of 528 implants, 412 (78%) had a marginal bone loss (MBL) ≤ 0 mm at the end of the observation time, and 106 surviving implants (22%) showed a mean MBL of 1.42 ± 1.08 mm (range: 0.25 to 6.75 mm). CONCLUSIONS: An overall medium-term SR of the EV implants was 92.6%. Four of five EV implants showed a mid-term MBL ≤ 0 mm, and 91.86% of implants completed the observation period with an MBL < 2 mm. Thus, the EV implant system was shown to be a valid alternative for routine use in a nonuniversity setting. Clinicians should remember that there is no 100% implant survival in everyday practice and that bruxism, periodontitis, narrow-diameter implants, and immediate placement are risk factors for a higher failure rate.

Pulpectomy vs. Pulpotomy as Alternative Emergency Treatments for Symptomatic Irreversible Pulpitis-A Multicenter Comparative Randomised Clinical Trial on Patient Perceptions.

AIM: There needs to be more general agreement on the most effective treatment for the emergency patient with Symptomatic Irreversible Pulpitis (SIP). This equivalence randomised clinical study compared the clinical efficiency, as an urgent treatment, of pulpotomy (POT) and pulpectomy (PEC) in the permanent teeth with SIP. The primary outcome was pain management, and the secondary outcome was the patient's perception of duration, comfort, and satisfaction. MATERIAL & METHODS: 80 patients were blindly and randomly allocated into two equal parallel groups, the control group treated by PEC and the test group by POT. Data were collected through numerical rating scales (NRS) during the intervention and 6, 24, and 72 h post-op. Non-parametric tests were used to analyse the data. The Brunner-Longer models were adopted for longitudinal data and the analysis of variance (ANOVA)-type statistical was used. RESULTS: The mean preoperative pain levels for the whole sample scored 5.8 ± 2.8 and significantly decreased to 2.1 ± 2.4 at 6 h, 1.5 ± 2.1 at 24 h, and 1.3 ± 2 at 72 h, without any differences between the groups. No significant differences were found in the patient's perception of treatment discomfort or duration between the groups. Three days after the intervention, patient satisfaction was high, with 9.2 ± 1.7 and 9.1 ± 2 in the PEC and POT groups, respectively. Self-reported pain was the only variable penalising the patient's final satisfaction. CONCLUSIONS: The current randomised control trial (RCT) showed that both pulpectomy and pulpotomy effectively eliminate pain and achieve high levels of patient satisfaction. Furthermore, the patient's perceptions of the duration and discomfort of the two treatments were similar. Given that pulpotomy is a faster and more straightforward technique, it may be recommended as a viable and pragmatic option for treating emergency patients with symptomatic irreversible pulpitis.

Dimensional Alterations Following Immediate Implant Placement Using the Socket-Shield Technique in the Anterior Maxilla: A Case Series.

Tissue volume loss after tooth extraction is an esthetic challenge. The socket-shield technique (SST) has been used to compensate it with promising results but limited evidence. This prospective study aims to present the dimensional changes after SST. Ten consecutive patients with an anterior hopeless tooth to be extracted and an immediate implant placed using the SST were prospectively enrolled. An impression and a CBCT scan were taken prior to surgery and 6 months later. Models were scanned, and DICOM and STL (standard tessellation language) files were superimposed and analyzed by software to measure the dimensional differences. Five patients could be evaluated for bone alterations and 9 for soft tissue alterations. The mean horizontal shrinkage of the buccal bone plate at 1 mm from the most coronal part was -0.22 ± 0.13 mm in the CBCT analysis. The mean volume loss in the region of interest was -2.94 ± 2.45 mm3, with a mean change in soft tissue contours of -0.49 ± 0.41 mm between pre- and postoperative analysis. SST limited the buccal contour loss after tooth extraction and may be considered a potential option to prevent volume loss in immediate implant placement. Further standardization in the digital measurement method is still needed.

Reconstructive aspects: Summary and consensus statements of group 3. The 5th EAO Consensus Conference 2018.

OBJECTIVES: The tasks of this working group were to evaluate the existing evidence on the efficiency and efficacy of the digital and conventional workflows for the fabrication of fixed implant reconstructions, to assess the performance of all-ceramic fixed implant reconstructions and, finally, to evaluate the outcomes of internally and externally connected implant abutments and reconstructions. METHODS: Four reviews were available analyzing the current literature on the respective topics. One review dealt with the efficiency and efficacy of digital and conventional fabrication workflows. Two reviews analyzed the outcomes of all-ceramic fixed implant reconstructions, one focusing on single-implant reconstructions and the other evaluating multiple-unit implant fixed dental prostheses (FDPs). The fourth review evaluated the clinical outcome on external, respectively, internal implant-abutment connections. These reviews were the basis for the discussions within the group and at the plenary sessions. RESULTS: The present consensus report gives the consensus statements, the clinical recommendations, and the implications for future research as discussed and approved by the plenum of the consensus conference. The four manuscripts by Mühlemann et al., Rabel et al., Pieralli et al., and Pjetursson et al. are published as part of the journal supplement of the present EAO consensus conference.