Aim Reports regarding prevalence of peri‐implant diseases show widely varying prevalence rates, which can be explained partially by variable diagnostic criteria adopted. Furthermore, several different factors have been associated with peri‐implant diseases. Hence, the aim of this cross‐sectional study is to (a) determine the prevalence, extent and severity of peri‐implant diseases in patients enrolled in a university dental clinic and (b) to evaluate the association between peri‐implantitis and patient/implant‐related factors. Material and Methods A total of 237 subjects from the Dental Department of Vita‐Salute San Raffaele University (Milan, Italy) with 831 implants with more than 1 year of follow‐up after loading were clinically evaluated. Implants showing bleeding on probing (BOP), with or without suppuration, and/or probing pocket depth (PPD) ≥ 4 mm, were radiographically analysed. Demographic and clinical data were collected to evaluate by multilevel regression analysis association with peri‐implantitis. Results The prevalence of peri‐implant mucositis and peri‐implantitis was 38.8% and 35%, respectively. Patients with a FMBS > 25%, having ≥4 implants as well as implants with plaque, PPD ≥ 4 mm or less than 1 mm of keratinized mucosa presented higher odds ratios for peri‐implantitis. Conclusions Peri‐implant diseases are frequent conditions affecting >70% of the patients. Several patient/implant‐related factors may influence the risk for peri‐implantitis.

No abstract

No abstract

(1) Background: The objective of this in vitro study is to evaluate the marginal accuracy of crowns created by CAD/CAM. (2) Methods: A customized chrome-cobalt (Cr-Co) implant abutment simulating a maxillary right first molar was fixed in a hemi-maxillary stone model and scanned. In total, 27 crowns were fabricated, including 9 lithium disilicate crowns, 9 composite crowns, and 9 zirconia crowns. The measurements were determined by scanning electron microscopy. Descriptive analysis was performed using the mean and standard deviation, while the Kruskal–Wallis test was performed to determine whether the marginal discrepancies were significantly different between each group (p < 0.05). (3) Results: The lowest marginal gap value was reported for zirconia (21.45 ± 12.58 µm), followed by composite (44.7 ± 24.96 µm) and lithium disilicate (62.28 ± 51.8 µm). The Kruskal–Wallis tests revealed a statistically significant difference (p-value < 0.05) in the mean marginal gaps between different materials. (4) Conclusions: The proposed digital workflow can be a viable alternative for fixed prosthetic rehabilitations. The best performance in terms of marginal gap was achieved by zirconia crowns, but all three materials demonstrate marginal closure below the clinically accepted threshold value (120 µm). Clinical significance: although significant differences were reported, the investigated CAD/CAM materials showed clinically acceptable marginal gaps.

Aim: The present pilot RCT aimed to investigate the influence of a connective tissue graft (CTG) in combination with the immediate implant placement (IIP) on hard and soft tissue healing, without a bone replacement graft in the gap between the implant and the socket walls. Materials and Methods:Thirty patients requiring extraction of one anterior tooth (from premolar to premolar) were randomly assigned to one of the two treatment groups (test: IIP + CTG; control: IIP). Cone-beam computed tomography and optically scans were performed before tooth extraction and at 6-month follow-up. Then, DICOM files were superimposed in order to allow the evaluation of osseous ridge and buccal bone changes, while the superimposition of DICOM and Standard Tessellation Language files allowed for evaluating of soft tissue contour. For testing the differences between the two groups, the non-parametric test as Wilcoxon rank-sum test, was used.Results: Twenty-six of the 30 enrolled patients attended the 6-month follow-up visit.The four patients of the control group that were lost to follow-up were analysed under the intention-to-treat principle. No statistically significant differences between the groups were observed for the vertical buccal bone resorption (p = .90), as well as for the horizontal buccal bone resorption at all measured levels. Significant differences were found between the test and control groups in the horizontal dimensional changes of osseous ridge at the most coronal aspect (p = .0003 and p = .02).Changes in tissue contour were between À0.32 and À0.04 mm in the test group and between À1.94 and À1.08 mm in the control group, while changes in soft tissue thickness varied between 1.33 and 2.42 mm in the test group and between À0.16 and 0.88 mm in the control group, with statistically significant differences for both variables at all measured levels. At 6 months, the mean volume increase was 6.76 ± 8.94 mm 3 and 0.16 ± 0.42 mm 3 in the test and control groups, respectively, with a statistically significant difference. Conclusions:The findings of the present study indicate that the adjunct of a CTG at the time of IIP, without bone grafting, does not influence vertical bone resorption.