. The clinical presentation and outcomes of the surgical management were analyzed. RESULTS: The 8 patients ranged in age from 16 to 48 years, with a mean age of 28.75 years. The lesion showed a male predilection with a male to female ratio, 3:1. Out of the eight cases 5 were located in mandible (62.5%) and 3 were present in maxilla (37.5%).

Aim: The present study aims to assess the efficacy of different periodontal dressing materials on wound healing clinically. Materials and methods: A total of 45 patients between the age group of 30-45 years, with chronic generalized periodontitis with loss of attachment of 3-6 mm, who require periodontal flap surgery, were screened to include in the study. Out of 45 subjects, 24 were males and 21 were females. The subjects were randomized into 3 groups as 15 in each. Group I: a collagen dressing, group II: light-cure dressing, and group III: non-eugenol-based dressing. The clinical parameters such as plaque index, vertical probing depth, pain, gingival index, and patient satisfaction were documented for all the three groups on the 7th and the 14th day. Visual analog scale (VAS) was used to score the pain severity. The SPSS 20 software was used to analyze the data. The significance level was set at 5%. Results: The mean gingival index score reduced from 1.40 ± 0.14 to 1.10 ± 0.30 in group I, from 1.48 ± 0.01 to 1.26 ± 0.22 in group II, and from 1.58 ± 0.16 to 1.33 ± 0.10 in group III. The mean plaque index score reduced from 1.48 ± 0.56 to 1.18 ± 0.40 in group I, from 1.46 ± 0.01 to 1.24 ± 0.48 in group II, and from 1.42 ± 0.12 to 1.20 ± 0.20 in group III. There was a statistical difference found in all the three groups and between the groups from the plaque and gingival index scores. The probing depth comparison shows a significant difference in group I. Patient satisfaction was almost similar in all the groups. The pain index showed the reduction in the pain severity from the 7th day to the 14th day in all the subjects from all the three groups. Conclusion:It can be concluded that the periodontal wound covered with a collagen dressing material showed significant evidence to provide symptomatic relief and better healing to the patients compared to that of light-cure and non-eugenol periodontal dressing material.

Aim: The present study was aimed to assess the success of immediate implants in the anterior esthetic zone. Materials and methods:Fifteen patients with 15 teeth to be replaced were selected for the study. After extraction, the socket was thoroughly cleaned and curetted with betadine and saline. Using physiodispenser and drills socket was prepared for implant insertion and implants were placed with initial stability with hand motion followed by complete insertion with hand ratchet. The socket was closed with 3-0 silk and medications were given with instructions to care for wound and recall after 1 week. The variables were measured postoperatively according to clinical parameters, i.e., mobility, exudate, pain, patient satisfaction score at a regular interval of 1, 3, 6 and 12th month. A p value of < 0.05 was considered as statistically significant. Qualitative data were analyzed using the Fischer exact test. Results:The mean age was found to be 23.33 years (range 14-38 years). There were 13 (86.6%) males and 2 (13.4%) females. Central incisors were replaced in 12 (80%) patients, lateral incisors were replaced in 2 (13.33%) patient and 1 st premolar was replaced in 1 (6.66%) patient. No pain, exudates was experienced by any of the patients in all 4 follow up scheduled. Only 2 (13.33%) implant which was experienced mobility of grade 1 at 12 months follow-up. Three (20%) patients had satisfaction scores of 8, 6 (40%) had a satisfaction score of 9 and 6 (40%) had a score of 10. Thus, the majority of patients were very happy with the implants placed. Conclusion:In conclusion, the present study has shown that immediate placement of implants in the anterior esthetic zone has a predictable success rate with good patient acceptance.Clinical significance: Clinically, placing an implant at the time of extraction has more advantages like healing time reduction, helps maintain alveolar architecture, surgical interventions will be decreased. So it helps enhance the success rate.

Aim: The aim of the present study was to assess the implant stability in immediate implant placement using different bone grafting materials. Materials and Methods: Twelve patients (5 males, 7 females, range of 40–58 years) were included in the study. All patients were divided into two groups based on the graft material used. For Group 1, Xenograft bone grafting material was used, and for Group 2, Freeze-dried bone allograft was used. The patients were suggested to rinse with 0.2% chlorhexidine mouth wash for 1 min. Periotome was used for atraumatic tooth extraction, and necessary care was taken to avoid fracture of socket wall. The implant was placed with respective bone grafting materials. An Orthopantomogram (OPG) radiograph is taken at the day of the operation to serve as baseline data for the marginal bone level. Clinical and radiological parameters were evaluated at baseline, 3 months, 6 months, and 12 months to assess the mean marginal bone level changes. Periotest was used for the measurement of implant stability. Results: The mean marginal bone level in Group 1 at baseline (13.58 ± 1.09), 3 months (12.64 ± 0.88), 6 months (12.02 ± 1.42), and 12 months (11.20 ± 1.26), respectively. In Group 2, the marginal bone level was at baseline (14.22 ± 0.26), 3 months (13.52 ± 1.28), 6 months (13.10 ± 0.32), and 12 months (12.12 ± 1.26), respectively. There was a statistically significant difference found in both the groups. Moreover, there was no statistically significant differences found between the groups at all the duration on intergroup comparison of the mean marginal bone level. The mean difference of implant stability in Group 1 the implant stability was 188.6 ± 22.5 and in Group 2 was 191.5 ± 18.2, and there was no statistically significant difference found between the groups. Conclusion: Both bone grafting materials used in the study showed improvement in implant stability and marginal bone levels after immediate placement of implant.

No abstract