Periodontitis is a chronic inflammatory disease characterized by the destruction of tooth-supporting structures, influenced by immune system dysregulation, oxidative stress, and imbalances in bone metabolism. Given its multifactorial pathogenesis, bioactive compounds such as vitamin D, melatonin, and omega-3 fatty acids have emerged as potential adjuncts to periodontal therapy due to their immunomodulatory, anti-inflammatory, and antioxidative properties. This narrative review explores the role of these three supplements in periodontal health, their potential in synergistic effects, and existing research gaps, providing a foundation for future studies on their clinical applications. Vitamin D is essential for calcium homeostasis, bone remodeling, and immune function. It modulates both innate and adaptive immune responses, enhancing antimicrobial peptide production and reducing inflammatory cytokine expression. Omega-3 fatty acids reduce the production of pro-inflammatory eicosanoids while promoting the synthesis of pro-resolving lipid mediators, contributing to bone preservation and immune balance. Melatonin, known for its antioxidant and osteogenic properties, supports bone remodeling by stimulating osteoblast proliferation and inhibiting osteoclast activity, while also regulating circadian rhythms, which may influence oral health. Although these bioactive compounds show promising effects in preclinical and clinical studies, significant knowledge gaps remain regarding optimal dosages, long-term efficacy, combined use, and standardized treatment protocols. Further clinical trials are necessary to elucidate their therapeutic value in periodontal disease management, especially those focused on their potential synergistic mechanisms. Understanding their synergistic mechanisms may open new avenues for adjunctive strategies in periodontal therapy.

Sports activities may induce long-lasting changes in mandibular trajectories. The aim was to compare condylar and mandibular movements in athletes with orofacial injuries with values measured in non-injured athletes. The group of 132 athletes without mandibular injury included asymptomatic athletes with a history of a blow to the right side (N = 43) and the group included asymptomatic athletes with a history of a blow to the left side (N = 41) of the mandible. The injured athletes suffered from stiffness/pain and/or limitation of jaw movements. The symptoms disappeared shortly after the injury. Athletes with a history of injury have smaller mean values of Bennett angle on the side of impact, and Bennett angle on the opposite side is greater than the mean found in non-injured athletes. Significantly smaller Bennett angle values in athletes with a history of a blow to one side of the mandible are due to the adaptability of the orofacial system. The larger Bennett angle on the opposite side of the injury is also due to the adaptive mechanism of the TMJ. Clinical Relevance: An individualized approach to TMJ values is mandatory in restorative procedures in every patient, especially in patients with a history of trauma to the orofacial system.

Introduction: A slide in centric is defined as a slide from centric relation to maximum intercuspation. Understanding contact between natural teeth is important for longevity of the stomatognathic system, diagnosis and therapy planning. The aim of this study was to determine the difference in the length of slide in centric in population according to dental status, sex and previous orthodontic therapy. Materials and methods: The study was conducted on a sample of 33 students at the University of Split, School of Medicine (dental study). Results: Slide values do not follow normal or Gaussian distribution according to the Kolmogorov–Smirnov test (p<0.05). For that reason, they were represented by the median as a measure of central tendency. The arithmetic mean of a slide in centric is 0.95 mm ± 0.47 mm. A slide in centric was not present in only 10% of the subjects. A slide between 0.5 mm and 1.5 mm to maximum intercuspation was present in 90% of the examinees. There was no statistically significant difference in the length of slide between the subjects who had all teeth and those who had missing teeth 1-4 (z= 0.507; p= 0.612). There was no significant difference in the length of slide between women and men (z= 0, p=1). There was no significant difference in the length of slide between the patients who underwent orthodontic therapy and those who did not (z=0.253; p=0.800). Conclusion: There is some controversy about slide in centric and its etiological role in the development of temporomandibular disorders. Slide in centric is very significant because it indicates occlusal instability and can eventually lead to temporomandibular dysfunction, which do not have to be of the same aetiology.