Marked dimensional alterations had occurred in the edentulous ridge after 3 months of healing following the extraction of the distal root of mandibular pre-molars. The placement of an implant in the fresh extraction site obviously failed to prevent the re-modelling that occurred in the walls of the socket. The resulting height of the buccal and lingual walls at 3 months was similar at implants and edentulous sites and vertical bone loss was more pronounced at the buccal than at the lingual aspect of the ridge. It is suggested that the resorption of the socket walls that occurs following tooth removal must be considered in conjunction with implant placement in fresh extraction sockets.

SCTGs, coronally advanced flaps alone or associated with other biomaterial, and GTR may be used as root-coverage procedures for the treatment of localized recession-type defects. In cases where root coverage and gain in keratinized tissue are expected, the use of SCTGs seems to be more adequate.

Tooth extraction induces a series of complex and integrated local changes within the investing hard and soft tissues. These local alterations arise in order to close the socket wound and to restore tissue homeostasis, and are referred to as '"socket healing". The aims of the present report were twofold: first, to describe the socket-healing process; and, second, to discuss what can be learned from the temporal sequence of healing events, in order to improve treatment outcomes. The socket-healing process may be divided into three sequential, and frequently overlapping, phases: inflammatory; proliferative; and modeling/remodeling. Several clinical and experimental studies have demonstrated that the socket-healing process promotes up to 50% reduction of the original ridge width, greater bone resorption at the buccal aspect than at the lingual/palatal counterpart and a larger amount of alveolar bone reduction in the molar region. In conclusion, tooth extraction, once a simple and straightforward surgical procedure, should be performed in the knowledge that ridge reduction will follow and that further clinical steps should be considered to compensate for this, when considering future options for tooth replacement.

The bone-to-implant contact that was established during the early phase of socket healing following implant installation was in part lost when the buccal bone wall underwent continued resorption.

Sockets that following tooth removal had their PDL tissue removed exhibited similar features of healing after 3 months as sockets which had the PDL retained. The tissues present in an extraction site appeared to be more mature than those present in a surgically produced defect of similar dimension. The Bio-Oss Collagen augmented defect exhibited less wound shrinkage than the non-augmented defect.

Root coverage procedures for treating localised and multiple recession-type defects.

Subepithelial connective tissue grafts, coronally advanced flap alone or associated with other biomaterial and guided tissue regeneration may be used as root coverage procedures for the treatment of localised recession-type defects. In cases where both root coverage and gain in the keratinized tissue are expected, the use of subepithelial connective tissue grafts seems to be more adequate. Randomised controlled clinical trials are necessary to identify possible factors associated with the prognosis of each PPS procedure. The potential impact of bias on these outcomes is unclear.

Background This updated Cochrane systematic review (SR) evaluated the efficacy of different root coverage (RC) procedures in the treatment of single and multiple gingival recessions (GR). Methods We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) only of at least 6 months’ duration evaluating Miller's Class I or II GR (≥3 mm) treated by means of RC procedures. Five databases were searched up to January 16, 2018. Random effects meta‐analyses were conducted thoroughly. Results We included 48 RCTs in the SR. The results indicated a greater GR reduction for subepithelial connective tissue grafts (SCTG) + coronally advanced flap (CAF) compared to guided tissue regeneration with resorbable membranes (GTR rm) + CAF (mean difference [MD]: −0.37 mm). There was insufficient evidence of a difference in GR reduction between acellular dermal matrix grafts (ADMG) + CAF and SCTG + CAF or between enamel matrix derivative (EMD) + CAF and SCTG + CAF. Greater gains in the keratinized tissue width (KTW) were found for SCTG + CAF when compared to EMD + CAF (MD: −1.06 mm), and SCTG + CAF when compared to GTR rm + CAF (MD: −1.77 mm). There was insufficient evidence of a difference in KTW gain between ADMG + CAF and SCTG + CAF. Conclusions SCTG, CAF alone or associated with another biomaterial may be used for treating single or multiple GR. There is also some evidence suggesting that ADMG appear as the soft tissue substitute that may provide the most similar outcomes to those achieved by SCTG.