Hari Petsos

Aim To evaluate site‐related changes in periodontal pocket depth (PPD) after non‐surgical periodontal therapy and to identify predictors for PPD changes in a retrospective patient data analysis. Materials and Methods PPD, clinical attachment level, bleeding on probing, tooth mobility (TM), furcation involvement (FI), abutment status, adherence to supportive periodontal care (SPC) and SPC follow‐ups were obtained from fully documented patient data before periodontal therapy (baseline, T0), after active periodontal therapy (APT, T1) and during SPC (T2). PPD changes were classified into deteriorated or unchanged/improved at the site level. Multi‐level logistic regression analysis was performed to identify factors influencing PPD changes during SPC. Results This retrospective study included 51 females and 65 males (mean T0 age: 54.8 ± 10.1 years, 25 smokers, 12 diabetics) suffering from Stage III/IV periodontitis. Evaluation outcome: T0/16,044 sampling sites/2674 teeth; T1/15,636/2606; T2/14,754/2459. During 9.0 ± 2.3 years SPC, PPD decreased (−1.33 ± 0.70 mm) by 21.8% of the sites, remained unchanged by 41.4% and increased (1.40 ± 0.78 mm) by 36.8%. Distopalatal FI ( p < .001, odds ratio [OR]: 0.252, 95% confidence interval [CI] for OR: 0.118–0.540), residual pockets ( p < .001, OR: 0.503, 95% CI: 0.429–0.590) and TM Degrees I–III (Degree I: p = .002, OR: 0.765, 95% CI: 0.646–0.905; Degree II: p = .006, OR: 0.658, 95% CI: 0.489–0.886; Degree III: p = .023, OR: 0.398, 95% CI: 0.180–0.879) correlated significantly with increasing PPD. Conclusions Over 75% of PPD remained unchanged or increased during SPC. Distopalatal FI, TM Degrees I–III and residual pockets after APT lead to worsening of periodontal pockets.

Aim To assess the esthetic and clinical performance of a novel self‐tapping implant system for single‐tooth restorations in the esthetic zone after immediate placement and provisionalization. Materials and Methods This cross‐sectional study included 52 patients contributing a total of 52 immediately placed and restored implants with ≥12 months after functional loading, comparing two different implant systems: Straumann® BLX (Institut Straumann AG, Basel, Switzerland; 25 patients) and Ankylos® (Dentsply Sirona, Hanau, Germany; 27 patients). As the primary outcome measure, peri‐implant tissue esthetics were assessed by means of pink esthetics score (PES) rated by three independent clinicians. Moreover, as secondary outcome measures, the peri‐implant tissue health was assessed by means of bleeding on probing, probing depth, and suppuration. Apart from that, the modified plaque index, keratinized mucosa width, and the presence of mucosal recessions were also assessed. When clinical signs suggested the possibility of peri‐implantitis, radiographs were indicated to assess progressive bone loss. Results The mean PES ratings were 12.10 ± 1.10 for Ankylos versus 11.2 ± 1.86 for BLX, both achieving good esthetic results without significant differences ( p = 0.143). There were no differences among most clinical parameters (plaque, bleeding on probing, probing depth, peri‐implant mucosal recession), although peri‐implant mucositis was present in one‐third of the cases. The inter‐rater agreement on esthetics was not significant ( p < 0.250). Conclusion Within the limitations of the present study, it was concluded that the use of either BLX or Ankylos implant systems was associated to comparable peri‐implant health and good pink esthetic outcomes during immediate implantation and restoration protocols, for at least 12 months.