Objectives: The aim was to evaluate the role of resorbable membranes applied over customized titanium meshes related to soft tissue healing and bone regeneration after vertical/horizontal bone augmentation.Materials and Methods: Thirty patients with partial edentulism of the maxilla/mandible, with vertical/horizontal reabsorption of the alveolar bone, and needing implant‐supported restorations, were randomly divided into two groups: Group A was treated using only custom‐made meshes (Mesh‐) and Group B using custom‐made meshes with cross‐linked collagen membranes (Mesh+). Data collection included surgical/technical and healing complications, “pseudo‐periosteum” thickness, bone density, planned bone volume (PBV), regenerated bone volume (RBV), regeneration rate (RR), vertical bone gain (VBG), and implant survival in regenerated areas. Statistical analysis was performed between the two study groups using a significance level of α = .05.Results: Regarding the healing complications, the noninferiority analysis proved to be inconclusive, despite the better results of group Mesh+ (13%) compared to group Mesh‐ (33%): estimated value −1.13 CI‐95% from −0.44 to 0.17. Superiority approach confirmed the absence of significant differences (p = .39). RBV was 803.27 mm³ and 843.13 mm³, respectively, and higher RR was observed in group Mesh+ (82.3%) compared to Mesh‐ (74.3%), although this value did not reach a statistical significance (p = .44). All 30 patients completed the study, receiving 71 implants; 68 out of them were clinically stable and in function.Conclusion: The results showed that customized meshes alone do not appear to be inferior to customized meshes covered by cross‐linked collagen membranes in terms of healing complication rates and regeneration rates, although superior results were observed in group Mesh+compared to group Mesh‐ for all variables.

This systematic review of RCTs aimed to characterize short- and long-term changes in peri-implantitis-associated microbiota (total biofilm microbial load and predominant pathogens’ counts) following (any) peri-implantitis treatment in systemically healthy, non-smoking, partially/totally edentulous adults. The study protocol, compliant with the PRISMA statement, was registered on PROSPERO (CRD42024514521) before the literature search. Data from 11 RCTs, assessed through the ROBINS-2 tool, were qualitatively synthesized. No data were retrieved on total edentulism, healthy peri-implant/periodontal sites, treated mucositis, gingivitis, and periodontitis sites. Shortly after treatment, Prevotella intermedia, Fusobacterium nucleatum, and Peptostreptococcus micros prevailed, indicating early colonization, as after implant placement. After both surgical and non-surgical approaches, although not eradicated, the peri-implant total biofilm load, red- and orange-complex species, and Aggregatibacter actinomycetemcomitans counts generally decreased for up to about three months. However, one month after treatment, red-complex species and Prevotella intermedia increased, likely due to persistent tissue-invasive bacteria, unresolved pathological conditions (high probing depth values) favoring anaerobiosis and dysbiosis, and a qualitatively and quantitatively decreased biofilm community, competing and balancing the predominant pathogens (biofilm “competitive balancing” effect), thus allowing recolonization by more virulent bacteria. Red-complex bacteria gradually leveled off to baseline at the six- and twelve-month follow-ups. Fusobacterium nucleatum remained almost unchanged after treatment.

Introduction: The primary aim of this systematic review was to investigate and compare the outcomes of different vertical ridge augmentation (VRA) techniques in relation to peri‐implant bone loss (PBL), after at least 12 months of functional loading.Material and methods: The search was conducted to find all the studies about VRA and measurements of PBL with at least 12 months follow‐up. Three pairwise meta‐analysis (MA) was performed to completely evaluate the outcomes.Results: A total of 42 studies were included, of which 11 were randomized clinical trials (RCTs). RCTs were available only for guided bone regeneration (GBR), onlay, and inlay techniques. The weighted mean estimate (WME) of PBL value was found to be 1.38 mm (95% confidence interval [95% CI]: 1.10–1.66) after a mean follow‐up of 41.0 ± 27.8 months. GBR, Inlay, Onlay, osteodistraction, and SBB represented in weight 32.9%, 30.6%, 25.0%, 7.6%, and 3.9%, respectively; and their WME (95% CI) were 1.06 (0.87–1.26) mm, 1.72 (1.00–2.43) mm, 1.31 (0.87–1.75) mm, 1.81 (0.87–1.75) mm, and 0.66 (0.55–0.77) mm, respectively. Among the secondary outcomes, the analysis was conducted for vertical bone gain, healing complication rate, surgical complication rate, implant survival, and success rate.Conclusions: The primary findings of the meta‐analysis, based on the changes between final and baseline values, showed that the peri‐implant bone loss could be influenced by the type of intervention but there is a need to evaluate in RCTs the behavior of the peri‐implant bone levels after long‐term follow‐up for all techniques.

Amelogenins are enamel matrix proteins currently used to treat bone defects in periodontal surgery. Recent studies have highlighted the relevance of amelogenin-derived peptides, named LRAP, TRAP, SP, and C11, in bone tissue engineering. Interestingly, these peptides seem to maintain or even improve the biological activity of the full-length protein, which has received attention in the field of bone regeneration. In this article, the authors combined a systematic and a narrative review. The former is focused on the existing scientific evidence on LRAP, TRAP, SP, and C11’s ability to induce the production of mineralized extracellular matrix, while the latter is concentrated on the structure and function of amelogenin and amelogenin-derived peptides. Overall, the collected data suggest that LRAP and SP are able to induce stromal stem cell differentiation towards osteoblastic phenotypes; specifically, SP seems to be more reliable in bone regenerative approaches due to its osteoinduction and the absence of immunogenicity. However, even if some evidence is convincing, the limited number of studies and the scarcity of in vivo studies force us to wait for further investigations before drawing a solid final statement on the real potential of amelogenin-derived peptides in bone tissue engineering.

Background: Any oral potentially malignant disorders (OPMDs) must be regularly monitored through clinical examination to detect any possible malignant transformation. Conventional intraoral exams, however, can be difficult because these conditions may resemble benign lesions. For this reason, several non-invasive diagnostic technologies have been developed to help the clinician in detecting and distinguishing between cancerous and benign lesions. Epithelial dysplasia can be considered the most important predictor of malignant evolution. Therefore, in this study we aim to evaluate the ability of an optical filter for autofluorescence Glasses for Oral Cancer Curing Light Exposed (GOCCLES^®) and of toluidine blue staining in identifying dysplastic areas in patients with OPMDs. Methods: In this retrospective study, medical records, photographs and videos of 25 patients with oral lesions were analyzed. Forty-two biopsy samples in 25 patients with OPMDs and at least one suspicious oral mucosa lesion that were evaluated in white light, autofluorescence with optical filter GOCCLES^®, toluidine blue staining and then biopsied with histopathological analysis were analyzed. Results: The sensitivity and specificity for the autofluorescence evaluation with GOCCLES^® for identifying dysplasia or carcinoma were 66% and 48%, respectively. The positive and negative predictive values were 34% and 77%, respectively, and the accuracy was 53%. The sensitivity and specificity for toluidine blue staining were 91% and 68%, respectively. The positive and negative predictive values were 55% and 95%, respectively, and the accuracy was 75%. Conclusions: The optical filter for autofluorescence (GOCCLES^®) and toluidine blue staining are simple, inexpensive, rapid and non-invasive procedures that can assist the clinician in distinguishing OPMDs from healthy mucosa but they are not able to distinguish benign and malignant lesions.