The benefits of prophylactic antibiotics are well recognized in dentistry. However, their routine use in the placement of endosseous dental implants remains controversial. As part of the comprehensive Dental Implant Clinical Research Group (DICRG) clinical implant study, the preoperative or postoperative use of antibiotics, the type used, and the duration of coverage were left to the discretion of the surgeon. These data for 2,973 implants were recorded and correlated with failure of osseointegration during healing (Stage 1), at surgical uncovering (Stage 2), before loading the prosthesis (Stage 3), and from prosthesis loading to 36 months (Stage 4). The results showed a significantly higher survival rate at each stage of treatment in patients who had received preoperative antibiotics.

No abstract

Overall, there was no clinically significant difference between the periodontal-type measurements for HA-coated and non-HA-coated implants followed for a period from 3 through 36 months. The concerns about HA-coated implants being associated with adverse periodontal responses for the HA chemical composition included in this study appear to be unfounded for a period of clinical performance up to 36 months.

One hundred thirty-seven V.A. patients were randomized to one of three treatment groups to evaluate the efficacy of biphasic calcium phosphate (BCP) ceramic in the treatment of periodontal osseous defects. This material was tested against both autogenous bone implant and open flap curettage procedures. Baseline probing attachment level, Navy plaque index, and gingival index were recorded for all patients. These parameters were monitored for 3 years. At the end of this period, 101 patients had completed the study. Although the plaque and gingival indices steadily increased with time, there were no statistically significant differences among the treatment groups. Patients in the ceramic group had a gain in attachment level of 1.0 mm; those in the curettage group, 0.9 mm; and 0.4 mm for those in the bone implant group. Although the BCP patients had a greater gain, the difference was not statistically significant. In this veteran population, not only did BCP patients fail to outperform those in the control groups, all three treatment groups were similarly ineffective.