Background: Recommendations for soft tissue management associated with customized bone regeneration should be developed. The aim of this study was to evaluate a new protocol for customized bone augmentation in a digital workflow. Methods: The investigators implemented a treatment of three-dimensional bone defects based on a customized titanium mesh (Yxoss CBR®, ReOSS, Filderstadt, Germany). Patients and augmentation sites were retrospectively analysed focussing on defect regions, demographic factors, healing difficulties and potential risk factors. An exposure rate was investigated concerning surgical splint application, A®-PRF and flap design. Results: In total, 98 implants could be placed. Yxoss CBR® was removed after mean time of 6.53 ± 2.7 months. Flap design was performed as full flap preparation (27.9%), full flap and periosteal incision (39.7%), periosteal incision (1.5%), poncho/split flap (27.9%) and rotation flap (2.9%). In 25% of the cases, exposures of the meshes were documented. Within this exposure rate, most of them were slight and only punctual (A = 16.2%), like one tooth width (B = 1.5%) and complete (C = 7.4%). A®-PRF provided significantly less exposures of the titanium meshes (76.5% no exposure vs. 23.5% yes, p = 0.029). Other parameters like tobacco abuse (p = 0.669), diabetes (p = 0.568) or surgical parameters (mesh size, defect region, flap design) did not influence the exposure rate. Surgical splints were not evaluated to reduce the exposure rate (p = 0.239). Gender (female) was significantly associated with less exposure rate (78,4% female vs. 21.6% male, p = 0.043). Conclusions: The results of this study suggest that the new digital protocol including patient-specific titanium meshes, resorbable membranes and bone grafting materials was proven to be a promising technique. To improve soft tissue healing, especially A®-PRF should be recommended.

No abstract

BackgroundThe aim of the study was to analyse intraoral neurophysiological changes in patients with unilateral lingual nerve lesions as well as patients with Burning Mouth Syndrome (BMS) by applying a standardized Quantitative Sensory Testing (QST) protocol.MethodsThe study included patients suffering from a peripheral lesion of the lingual nerve (n = 4), from BMS (n = 5) and healthy controls (n = 8). Neurophysiological tests were performed in the innervation areas of the tongue bilaterally. For BMS patients the dorsal foot area was used as reference.ResultsFor patients with peripheral lesion of the lingual nerve the affected side of the tongue showed increased thresholds for thermal (p < 0.05–0.001) and mechanical (p < 0.01–0.001) QST parameters, indicating a hypoesthesia and thermal hypofunction. In BMS patients, a pinprick hypoalgesia (p < 0.001), a cold hyperalgesia (p < 0.01) and cold/warmth hypoesthesia (p < 0.01) could be detected.ConclusionsThe results of this study verified the lingual nerve lesion in our patients as a peripheral dysfunction. The profile showed a loss of sensory function for small and large fibre mediated stimuli. A more differentiated classification of the lingual nerve injury was possible with QST, regarding profile, type and severity of the neurologic lesion. BMS could be seen as neuropathy with variable central and peripheral contributions among individuals resulting in chronic pain.

No abstract

Monitoring of trigeminal nerve fiber functions by QST intra- and extraoral is feasible to evaluate oral sensory pattern after implantation procedures. Sensory disturbances of the inferior alveolar nerve were shown to be avoided by keeping an average safety zone of 2.65 mm between implant and nerve.

BackgroundThe purpose of this study was to characterize patients with chronic temporomandibular disorders (TMD) in terms of existing hyperalgesia against cold, heat and pressure.MethodsThe extent of hyperalgesia for pressure and thermal sensation in TMD patients was determined by the use of the painDETECT questionnaire ("Is cold or heat in this area occasionally painful?” “Does slight pressure in this area, e.g., with a finger, trigger pain?") and experimental somatosensory testing against thermal and pressure stimuli (Quantitative Sensory Testing; QST). In addition, we explored psychological comorbidity among the chronic TMD patients (hospital anxiety and depression scale, HADS-D and coping strategies questionnaire, CSQ).ResultsNineteen patients with chronic TMD and 38 healthy subjects participated in the study. N = 12 patients had a painDETECT score ≤ 12, n = 3 patients had a painDETECT score of 13–18 and n = 4 patients had a painDETECT score ≥ 19. TMD patients with painDETECT scores ≥19 had moderately, strong or very strong enhancement of thermal and pressure pain perception, whereas patients with painDETECT scores 13–18 and ≤ 12 responded these questions with “never”, “hardly noticed” or “slightly painful” (p < 0.05–0.01). With increasing painDETECT scores we found increased hyperalgesia for pressure (p < 0.01) and thermal stimuli (p < 0.05) in QST. The patients with a painDETECT score ≥ 19 showed increased signs of anxiety (p < 0.05), depression (p < 0.01), praying and hoping (p < 0.05).ConclusionThe present study has shown that the PainDETECT questionnaire can be a helpful additional diagnostic tool. Together with QST, the PainDETECT questionnaire detected hyperalgesia for pressure and thermal sensation. Therefore the PainDETECT questionnaire is helpful to decide which TMD patients should undergo QST.

No abstract

Augmentation procedures did not increase sensory disturbances, indicating no changes in the neurophysiological pathways. Extended augmentation procedures did not lead to sensory changes either or result in an impaired quality of life or modified anxiety and depression scores.