Objective: To identify the influence of prosthetic features through a comprehensive analysis with other known risk factors. Materials and methods:A total of 169 patients (n = implants: 349) was retrospectively included in the present study. Peri-implantitis was diagnosed based on periimplant bone loss and probing depth. Using radiographs taken 1 and 5 years following prosthesis insertion, the following features were determined: peri-implant marginal bone loss (MBL), emergence angle (EA), emergence profile (EP) and crown/implant ratio (CIR). The splinted position of prosthesis was also recorded. Multivariable generalized estimating equation was used to analyse the influence of each feature on the prevalence of peri-implantitis. The final prediction model was constructed by Cox proportional hazard regression analysis. Results:The EA showed a significant correlation with MBL. A statistically greater prevalence of peri-implantitis was observed if EA ≥ 30 degrees, when EP is convex and in middle implant splinted with both mesial and distal adjacent implants in bonelevel implant. A similar correlation was not observed in tissue-level implants. CIR had no significant effect on the prevalence of peri-implantitis. Conclusion:Over-contoured implant prosthesis is a critical local confounder for peri-implantitis. The implant splinted to both mesial and distal adjacent implant has a higher risk of peri-implantitis. K E Y W O R D Semergence angle, emergence profile, Peri-implantitis, restoration contour, splinted

Objective To verify whether ridge preservation is effective in the reduction of dimensional loss and in bone formation compared to spontaneous healing in extraction sockets of periodontally compromised teeth. Methods Twenty‐six subjects requiring tooth extraction for stage III/IV periodontitis were randomly assigned to one of two interventions: alveolar ridge preservation using collagenated bovine bone mineral and a resorbable collagen membrane (test, RP) or spontaneous healing (control, SH). Six months later, postoperative cone‐beam computed tomography (CBCT) was performed to measure the linear and volumetric changes of the sockets compared to baseline scans. Biopsies were retrieved at the implant site for histomorphometric calculations. Nonparametric tests were applied for statistical analysis. Results Significantly less shrinkage occurred in RP compared to SH, mainly in the crestal zone. The width loss difference between groups was 3.3 mm and 2.2 mm at 1 mm and 3 mm below the crest, respectively (p < .05). RP yielded a gain in socket height of 0.25 mm, whereas a loss of −0.39 mm was observed in SH (p < .05). The percentage of volume loss recorded in RP was also less than that recorded in SH (−26.53% vs −50.34, p < .05). Significantly less bone proportion was detected in biopsies from RP (30.1%) compared with SH (53.9%). A positive association between baseline bone loss and ridge shrinkage was found in SH but not in RP. Conclusion Ridge preservation in extraction sockets of periodontally compromised teeth was effective in reducing the amount of ridge resorption.

An infected socket shows delayed healing of the socket wound, and HA, because of its osteoinductive, bacteriostatic, and anti-inflammatory properties, may improve bone formation and accelerate wound healing in infected sockets.

Purpose Previous studies have solely focused on fresh extraction sockets, whereas in clinical settings, alveolar sockets are commonly associated with chronic inflammation. Because the extent of tissue destruction varies depending on the origin and the severity of inflammation, infected alveolar sockets may display various configurations of their remaining soft and hard tissues following tooth extraction. The aim of this study was to classify infected alveolar sockets and to provide the appropriate treatment approaches. Methods A proposed classification of extraction sockets with chronic inflammation was developed based upon the morphology of the bone defect and soft tissue at the time of tooth extraction. The prevalence of each type of the suggested classification was determined retrospectively in a cohort of patients who underwent, between 2011 and 2015, immediate bone grafting procedures (ridge preservation/augmentation) after tooth extractions at Seoul National University Dental Hospital. Results The extraction sockets were classified into 5 types: type I, type II, type III, type IV (A & B), and type V. In this system, the severity of bone and soft tissue breakdown increases from type I to type V, while the reconstruction potential and treatment predictability decrease according to the same sequence of socket types. The retrospective screening of the included extraction sites revealed that most of the sockets assigned to ridge preservation displayed features of type IV (86.87%). Conclusions The present article classified different types of commonly observed infected sockets based on diverse levels of ridge destruction. Type IV sockets, featuring an advanced breakdown of alveolar bone, appear to be more frequent than the other socket types.

Purpose This study evaluated differences in bone healing and remodeling among 3 implants with different surfaces: sandblasting and large-grit acid etching (SLA; IS-III Active ® ), SLA with hydroxyapatite nanocoating (IS-III Bioactive ® ), and SLA stored in sodium chloride solution (SLActive ® ). Methods The mandibular second, third, and fourth premolars of 9 dogs were extracted. After 4 weeks, 9 dogs with edentulous alveolar ridges underwent surgical placement of 3 implants bilaterally and were allowed to heal for 2, 4, or 12 weeks. Histologic and histomorphometric analyses were performed on 54 stained slides based on the following parameters: vertical marginal bone loss at the buccal and lingual aspects of the implant (b-MBL and l-MBL, respectively), mineralized bone-to-implant contact (mBIC), osteoid-to-implant contact (OIC), total bone-to-implant contact (tBIC), mineralized bone area fraction occupied (mBAFO), osteoid area fraction occupied (OAFO), and total bone area fraction occupied (tBAFO) in the threads of the region of interest. Two-way analysis of variance (3 types of implant surface×3 healing time periods) and additional analyses for simple effects were performed. Results Statistically significant differences were observed across the implant surfaces for OIC, mBIC, tBIC, OAFO, and tBAFO. Statistically significant differences were observed over time for l-MBL, mBIC, tBIC, mBAFO, and tBAFO. In addition, an interaction effect between the implant surface and the healing time period was observed for mBIC, tBIC, and mBAFO. Conclusions Our results suggest that implant surface wettability facilitates bone healing dynamics, which could be attributed to the improvement of early osseointegration. In addition, osteoblasts might become more activated with the use of HA-coated surface implants than with hydrophobic surface implants in the remodeling phase.