(1) Background: Persistent olfactory (POD) and gustatory (PGD) dysfunctions are one of the most frequent symptoms of long-Coronavirus Disease 2019 but their effect on the quality of life (QoL) of patients is still largely unexplored. (2) Methods: An online survey was administered to individuals who reported to have had SARS-CoV-2 infection at least 6 months prior with persisting COVID-19 symptoms (using the COVID symptom index), including ratings of POD and PGD, and their physical (PCS) and mental (MCS) components of quality of life were assessed using the standardized short form 12 questionnaire (SF-12). (3) Results: Responses from 431 unique individuals were included in the analyses. The most frequent persistent symptoms were: fatigue (185 cases, 42.9%), olfactory dysfunction (127 cases, 29.5%), gustatory dysfunction (96 cases, 22.3%) and muscle pain (83 cases, 19.3%). Respondents who reported persisting muscle pain, joint pain, fatigue, headache, gastrointestinal disturbances, and dyspnea had significantly worse PCS. Those experiencing persistent fatigue and dyspnea also showed significantly lower MCS. Respondents reporting POD or PGD showed significantly worse QoL, but only pertaining to the MCS. Multiple regressions predicted MCS based on olfactory and marginally on gustatory ratings, but not PCS. Age significantly affected the prediction of PCS but not MCS, and gender and temporal distance from the COVID-19 diagnosis had no effect. (4) Conclusions: POD and PGD are frequent symptoms of the long-COVID-19 syndrome and significantly reduce QoL, specifically in the mental health component. This evidence should stimulate the establishment of appropriate infrastructure to support individuals with persistent CD, while research on effective therapies scales up.

Recent reports on secondary restorations with subperiosteal implants have demonstrated promising results in terms of esthetic and functional restoration. We report the case of a reconstruction of a total maxillectomy with a custom-made subperiosteal implant associated with a temporal muscle flap in a patient who could not undergo bone reconstruction with a free flap. This technique made it possible to restore the division between the oral cavity and the mouth, providing a solid anchorage to the dental prosthesis and correcting an oroantral communication with a small palatal obturator. The subperiosteal implant also granted proper soft tissue support in the middle-third of the face. Subperiosteal implants can be safe and effective even in primary maxillary reconstructions for patients who cannot undergo free bone flap reconstructions. In these difficult cases, this type of implant can provide support to the soft tissues of the middle-third of the face and a solid anchorage for dental prostheses or palatal obturators, thus improving the quality of life for patients.

Counseling is considered a first-line conservative therapy with respect to temporomandibular joint disorders (TMJD). Nowadays, 50 to 80% of patients acquire health information from the internet before turning to professionals. The purpose of this study has been to investigate the quality of information about TMJD that patients can obtain from YouTube. A YouTube.com search was conducted using the terms “temporomandibular joint disorder”; “limited movement of the mandible”; and “mandibular joint pain”. The videos identified were assessed independently by two panels of three professional and lay reviewers with HONcode, modified DISCERN (MD) and the global quality scale (GQS). A total of 106 videos were included. The professional reviewers reported a mean HONcode score of 4.148 ± 1.314 and a mean MD score of 2.519 ± 1.267, testifying to a modest general quality of the videos. The mean GQS score was 2.987 ± 1.012 for the professional and 3.469 ± 0.891 for the lay reviewers (p < 0.001). The correlations between the ratings were significant between the reviewers within the same group but not between the two groups. The presence of animations significantly influenced the GQS score expressed by the lay reviewers (p = 0.011) but not that of the professionals (p = 0.640). The quality of the information on TMJD on YouTube is generally of poor quality. Healthcare systems and professionals should be prepared to correct misinformation and build trusting relationships with patients which are based on quality counseling. Similarly, academic institutions should produce quality content that leads patients with TMJD toward a correct diagnostic-therapeutic process.

The aim of this retrospective study has been to compare the surgical outcomes of patients undergoing superficial parotidectomy with three different instruments: bipolar electrocautery, ultrasound, and mixed energy instruments. The clinical records of 102 patients who had undergone superficial parotidectomy for benign tumors between January 2016 and April 2022 were considered. Based on the tool used during the surgery, the patients were divided into three study groups: classic electrocautery hemostasis group (CH group), ultrasonic instrument group (HA group), and combined energy instrument group (TB group). The duration of surgery, the total post-operative drainage volume, and the intra-operative blood loss were significantly higher in the CH group compared to the HA and the TB group, while the differences were not significant between the latter two groups. Facial nerve weakness was detected in 45.9% of the CH group, 12.5% of the HA group, and 21.2% of the TB group. The rate of facial nerve dysfunction in the CH group was significantly higher than in the HA group (0.011). In the patients who experienced post-operative facial nerve dysfunction, the recovery time was significantly shorter in the HA group compared to the CH and the TB group. The HA and TB groups have demonstrated comparable and significantly better surgical outcomes than bipolar electrocautery. Ultrasound instruments have been shown to cause, in comparison with the other techniques, a lower rate of temporary facial nerve dysfunction and, if this is present, lead to a faster spontaneous recovery time.

Background/Objectives: Contemporary patient-specific subperiosteal implants have re-emerged as graftless solutions for oral and maxillofacial rehabilitation, driven by advances in digital planning, CAD/CAM workflows, additive manufacturing, and biomaterial engineering. Their indications have progressively expanded from severely atrophic edentulous jaws to segmental defects, single-tooth replacement, congenital craniofacial anomalies, salvage situations, and oncologic reconstruction. This scoping review aimed to map the current evidence on modern patient-specific subperiosteal implants, focusing on indications, workflow, design principles, materials, outcomes, complications, and maintenance. Methods: A scoping review was conducted according to PRISMA-ScR principles to identify clinical studies, case series, case reports, systematic and scoping reviews, technical notes, finite element analyses, in vitro studies, and relevant translational investigations dealing with contemporary custom-made or CAD/CAM subperiosteal implants. The evidence was narratively synthesized according to clinical indication and thematic domains, including full-arch rehabilitation, sectional and single-tooth applications, congenital and post-oncologic defects, rescue indications, biomechanics, material selection, surface response, prosthetic protocols, and complication management. No quantitative meta-analysis was performed because of the scoping design and the substantial heterogeneity of study types, indications, implant systems, outcome definitions, and follow-up durations. Results: The final evidence map included 116 records, of which 56 were unique human clinical records with extractable denominators and 60 were biomechanical, in vitro, surface-biology, review, consensus, historical, or conceptual records. Of the 56 unique clinical records, 49 were mapped within the six indication-level clinical sections, while seven were retained as cross-cutting clinical evidence addressing patient-reported outcomes, design-related complications, bone apposition, anchorage strategy, comparative graftless rehabilitation, or reconstructive/prosthetic principles. The six indication-level sections included 52 clinical-record assignments: 15 for full-arch rehabilitation, 13 for segmental or sectional rehabilitation, one for single-tooth rehabilitation, four for congenital or craniofacial indications, 13 for post-oncologic or post-ablative reconstruction, and six for rescue or salvage indications. Because three records addressed more than one indication, these counts represent indication-level assignments rather than mutually exclusive clinical records. Reported survival in most short- to mid-term clinical series was generally high, commonly ranging from 90% to 100%, although lower values of 70–80% were reported in selected longer-term cohorts and survival clearly overestimated clinical success in some studies. Expanding applications include posterior mandibular and maxillary defects, lateral incisor agenesis, cleft-related or syndromic deformities, maxillectomy reconstruction, obturator support, and hybrid rehabilitation with endosseous implants; however, evidence for the indications at the extremes of this spectrum—single-tooth replacement and primary oncologic reconstruction—remains limited to small, largely single-group case series and reports. Soft-tissue events, including dehiscence, mucositis, recession, and framework exposure, were the dominant complications and showed wide variability, with reported recession/exposure rates ranging from approximately 10% in some sectional and full-arch series to as high as 65% in bilateral maxillary cohorts; their clinical significance varied from asymptomatic stable findings to progressive inflammatory complications requiring revision. Conclusions: Patient-specific subperiosteal implants represent a promising and increasingly versatile reconstructive option; however, the present findings should be interpreted as evidence mapping rather than as definitive comparative evidence. Their clinical use should remain highly selective, prosthetically driven, and supported by meticulous planning, rigid fixation, soft-tissue management, and structured maintenance. Standardized success criteria, longer follow-up, and comparative prospective studies are required.