The purpose of this study was to determine the degree of compliance with supportive periodontal treatment (SPT) recommended in private periodontal practice and to determine if any significant differences existed in the characteristics of compliant, non-compliant, and erratically compliant patients. The study covered a period of 14 years (1977 to 1991) and included 521 patients who were classified by sex, age, socioeconomic class, disease severity, treatment rendered, and the year maintenance began. Compliance was categorized into four groups: complete compliance, erratic compliance, patients who discontinued SPT, and patients who never presented for SPT. Females began SPT more often than males (P = 0.054). Only 27.4% of the patients were in complete compliance at the end of the study. A significantly greater percentage of females (P = 0.032) and patients who had been treated by only scaling and root planing (P = 0.014) were in complete compliance. Drop-out rates from SPT tended to decrease during the first 6 years from 13.9% in the first 2 years to 9% in the sixth year. Thereafter, the percentage of patients presenting for SPT stabilized at 48.4% after 6 and 43.2% after 11 years. Younger patients (P = 0.04), those who had received only scaling and root planing (P = 0.008), and individuals in socioeconomic class I (P = 0.017) had a significantly lower tendency to drop out. The results confirm that compliance to SPT in private periodontal practice is far from ideal. Suggestions for improving compliance are discussed.

This survey indicates that peri-implant diseases are a frequently encountered problem in periodontal practices and that the absence of a standard therapeutic protocol results in significant empirical use of therapeutic modalities and a moderately effective treatment outcome.

Ideal implant placement may reduce surgical complications, such as nerve injury and lingual cortical plate perforation, and minimize the likelihood of functional and prosthetic compromises. Guided implant surgery (GIS) has been used as the means to achieve ideal implant placement. GIS refers to the process of digital planning, custom‐guide fabrication, and implant placement using the custom guide and an implant system–specific guided surgery kit. GIS includes numerous additional steps beyond the initial prosthetic diagnosis, treatment planning, and fabrication of surgical guide. Substantial errors can occur at each of these individual steps and can accumulate, significantly impacting the final accuracy of the process with potentially disastrous deviations from proper implant placement. Pertinent overall strategies to reduce or eliminate these risks can be summarized as follows: complete understanding of the possible risks is fundamental; knowledge of the systems and tools used is essential; consistent verification of both diagnostic and surgical procedures after each step is crucial; proper training and surgical experience are critical. This review article summarizes information on the accuracy and efficacy of GIS, provides insight on the potential risks and problems associated with each procedural step, and offers clinically relevant recommendations to minimize or eliminate these risks.

Collagen matrix seal and CS, when combined with FDBA, significantly minimized ridge resorption in all dimensions and maintained buccal soft tissue thickness in sockets with a buccal plate loss of <2 mm in comparison to previously reported findings recorded after tooth extraction without ARP.

Epithelial cell discharge is a hitherto unreported, self-limiting, late complication of the SCTG procedure, and a potential association between this complication and the patient's dermatologic condition is suggested.