Objective: This study compared dental, periodontal, oral, and joint/muscle tenderness among Israeli combat-induced post-traumatic stress disorder (Ci-PTSD) war veterans to non-PTSD patients. Study design: This retrospective three-arm study compared oral and facial manifestations between 100 Israeli veterans with Ci- PTSD (study group) and 103 non-PTSD periodontal patients (Control group). The study group was further divided into two subgroups of individuals who received psychiatric medications (40 patients) or did not (60 patients). All patients underwent complete dental, oral, and periodontal examinations, including assessing signs of parafunction. Results: All PTSD patients had poor oral hygiene. The plaque index (PI) was higher in the PTSD group compared to the control group (0.72 ± 0.28 vs. 0.45 ± 0.29, respectively, p < 0.001). The decayed, missing, and filled teeth score (DMFt) was higher in the PTSD population than in the controls (19.97 ± 8.07 vs. 13.05 ± 6.23 p < 0.05). Severe periodontal disease was more common among the PTSD subgroup taking medications (med -group) (62.5%) compared to the nonmedicated group (non-med group) (30.0%) and the controls (27.2%) (p = 0.001). Heavy smoking was more prevalent in the medicated PTSD patients than in other groups. Conclusions: The present study shows higher morbidities in combat-induced PTSD patients, including oral, dental, and periodontal manifestations, especially in medicated patients.

Background and Objectives: Maintenance of a firm and long-term stable osseointegration is the primary goal of implant dentistry. Time is used to define implant failure characteristics. Early implant failure (EIF) occurs up to one year after loading. Recent studies indicated an association between proton pump inhibitors (PPI) therapy and failure of osseointegration. The present study assessed whether the use of PPIs is a risk factor to EIF. Materials and methods: A retrospective cohort study including 687 patients and 2971 dental implants. The study group (PPIs users) comprised 17.3% (119) individuals and 18.7% (555) implants. The remaining cohort (82.7% (568) individuals and 81.3% (2416) implants) served as control. The information was taken from the patients’ files. The following information was collected: age, gender, physical status, systemic diseases, HbA1C values before and after implant-supported prosthesis delivery in cases of diabetes mellitus, smoking, implant location, number of implants per individual, bone augmentation, implant brand, length and width, and EIF. EIF was defined as implant removal within a period of up to 12 months from loading. Results: EIF in PPIs vs. non-PPIs users was 19.3% vs. 14.3% (p = 0.16) at patient level and 5.4% vs. 3.5% at implant level (p = 0.03). Univariate analysis yielded factors significantly associated with PPIs use, including older age, physical status of the American Society of Anesthesiology (ASA) 3, hypertension, hyperlipidemia, diabetes mellitus, osteoporosis, cardiovascular accident (CVA), location (anterior mandible), shorter and narrower implants, and higher number of implants per individual. Multivariate analysis yielded statistically significant OR of 1.91; p = 0.01 for EIF following PPIs use and 2.3; p < 0.001 for location in anterior mandible. Conclusions: Patients and their healthcare providers are advised to carefully consider the potential risks of taking PPIs prior to dental implant surgery. Further research is needed to confirm these risks and elucidate systemic and local factors that may be involved in such outcomes.

Background: Conflicting results were found regarding the effect of corticosteroid (CS) administration upon wound healing. The objective of this pilot study was to evaluate the impact of CS administration at different time points on palatal wound healing in rats. Methods: A 4.2 mm diameter punch created a secondary healing excisional palatal defect in thirty-six (36) Wistar-derived, two-month-old male rats weighing 250–270 g. We evaluated the effect of CS by comparing wound healing between three equal groups: 12 rats who were not exposed to CS and two additional groups in which 1 mg/kg dexamethasone (1 mg/kg) was administered daily, early (1–4 days) and late (5–9 days) after injury. The dynamics of the healing process were evaluated weekly in 4 sacrificed rats from each group for three weeks. The wound area was assessed both macroscopically and microscopically; the inflammation score was assessed microscopically. Results: The initial wound area in all the rats was 13.85 mm². At the end of the study, it decreased to 4.11 ± 0.88 mm², 7.32 ± 2.11 mm², and 8.87 ± 3.01 mm² in control, early, and late CS administration groups, respectively (p = 0.075). Inflammation scores showed a tendency to decrease in the third week in all groups, with no statistical differences. Conclusions: Our findings do not support the positive impact of CS administration on palatal wound healing. While microscopically, we found no difference between the CS and control groups, CS exposure was associated with a macroscopically larger final wound area, reflecting a possible harmful effect of CS.