This review examines platelet-rich fibrin (PRF) efficacy in periodontal plastic surgery, highlighting its crucial role in promoting periodontal regeneration and healing. Various forms of PRF are discussed, like leukocyte- and platelet-rich fibrin, advanced PRF, and injectable PRF, in addition to their application in different periodontal procedures such as root coverage and increasing the width of keratinized tissue surrounding the teeth. This review emphasizes the biological benefits of PRF, such as faster wound healing, reduced postsurgical pain, and better management of bleeding. The presence of growth factors, cytokines, and leukocytes in PRF significantly aids in promoting tissue regeneration, thereby improving the clinical outcomes of periodontal therapy. This review also provides recommendations for further research using standardized PRF protocols to optimize the benefits of PRF in clinical practice.

Aim: The purpose of this systematic review was to evaluate methodological variations and outcome patterns in experimental gingivitis studies in human populations. Specifically, differences in induction duration, plaque control strategies, participant characteristics, and their influence on clinical, molecular, and immunologic markers of gingival inflammation were assessed. Methods: A systematic review of clinical trials and interventional studies involving experimental gingivitis induction via oral hygiene cessation or mechanical plaque accumulation was conducted. Eligible studies involved human participants and reported clinical (gingival index, bleeding on probing, plaque index) or biomarker outcomes. Data sources included peer-reviewed publications obtained through comprehensive database searches. Risk of bias and study quality were assessed. Findings were synthesized narratively due to heterogeneity in design and outcome measures. Results: The included studies (n = 10) varied in induction duration (9– 28 days) and plaque accumulation method (full-mouth vs stent-based models). Clinical indicators consistently increased during induction phases, though magnitudes varied by methodology and participant profile. Studies identified “fast”, “slow”, and “low” responder phenotypes, underscoring inter-individual variability. Increased pro-inflammatory cytokines (IL-1β, IL-6, TNF-α) and transcriptomic shifts were observed during active inflammation, with reversal during recovery. Methodological inconsistencies and a lack of standardization limited cross-study comparability. Conclusion: Experimental gingivitis (EG) models reliably induce acute, reversible inflammation. However, methodological heterogeneity and insufficient adjustment for patient-related confounders hinder direct comparisons. Future research should adopt standardized protocols and incorporate stratified analyses to refine causal insights and support clinical translation.

Background/Objectives: Extraction and replacement of hopeless teeth is a common practice in dentistry. Tooth autotransplantation (TA) offers several advantages as a viable and biological treatment option. However, its utilization in Saudi Arabia appears limited. Understanding dentists’ knowledge and attitudes toward TA is crucial for promoting its adoption in clinical practice. Therefore, the aim of this study is to assess the knowledge and attitudes of dentists in Saudi Arabia toward tooth autotransplantation. Methods: A cross-sectional study was conducted using a web-based questionnaire distributed to dentists across Saudi Arabia. The questionnaire included 19 questions assessing demographic characteristics, knowledge of TA, and attitudes toward its clinical application. Data were analyzed using SPSS v23 with chi-square and Cramér’s V tests to explore associations between variables (p < 0.05). Results: 253 dentists participated in this study. All participants had heard of TA, while only 26.5% reported moderate-to-high familiarity. Female dentists showed significantly greater interest in adopting TA than males (p = 0.038, Cramér’s V = 0.183). Specialists expressed higher familiarity than general dentists and underscored the importance of clinical guidelines, evidence-based outcomes, confidence in their capacity to engage in a TA team, the total number of required appointments, and malpractice concerns (p < 0.05) in their decision-making process. Nevertheless, general dentists demonstrated significantly more interest in implementing TA (p = 0.025, Cramér’s V = 0.192). Participants with more than 5 years of clinical dental experience were significantly more familiar with TA (p = 0.015, Cramér’s V = 0.204) and were more influenced by appointment numbers in decision-making (p = 0.012, Cramér’s V = 0.225). Conclusions: The study reveals limited familiarity but notable interest among dentists in Saudi Arabia toward TA. Addressing educational gaps by integrating TA training into dental curricula and offering clinical exposure opportunities to students, along with providing evidence-based clinical guidelines, and improving access to advanced imaging technologies, may enhance the adoption of TA as a viable treatment modality for tooth replacement.

Loss of the interdental papilla represents a frequent aesthetic and functional challenge in dentistry. Traditional surgical procedures can partially restore papillary form but are limited by technical sensitivity, donor-site morbidity, and unpredictable long-term results. Consequently, interest has shifted toward minimally invasive, biologically driven strategies for papilla reconstruction. Among non-surgical options, the injection of hyaluronic acid (HA) and the injectable form of platelet-rich fibrin (iPRF) have shown considerable promise. Combining microneedling (MN) enhances trans-mucosal delivery of the biologic agent and can boost regenerative outcomes. Despite promising results, direct comparisons between HA and MN + iPRF remain scarce. Therefore, the present study aims to compare the clinical outcomes of MN + iPRF versus HA gel injection in the reconstruction of Class I interdental papilla loss. This pilot study was conducted as a split-mouth, double-blind, randomized trial to compare the efficacy of MN + iPRF vs. HA injections in reconstructing interdental papillae. A total of seven adult patients (N = 7) were enrolled, contributing 20 interdental papillary sites based on individual clinical presentation. Each site was randomly assigned to one of two treatment groups: Group MN + iPRF (n = 10 sites), and Group HA (n = 10 sites). Clinical parameters measured at baseline, 6 weeks, and 12 weeks included papillary height and papillary width at three levels (base, middle, and tip), and Papillary thickness. Both techniques showed comparable improvements in papillae height and contour over the study period. Intergroup analysis showed no statistically significant difference in all parameters at any time point. This pilot study, with its small sample size, suggests comparable short-term outcomes, but larger studies are needed to determine definitive efficacy. The absence of statistical significance should therefore be interpreted cautiously and does not indicate equivalence between the two treatment approaches.

Background: Dental implants are a preferred treatment option for partially or completely edentulous patients. However, they come with challenges, such as peri‐implant diseases requiring effective maintenance, including water irrigation devices (WID). Objectives: This study investigated awareness and usage patterns of WID among patients with dental implants or planning to receive them. Methods: A cross‐sectional study was conducted among 211 patients visiting the implant clinic of King Abdulaziz University Dental Hospital in Jeddah (KAUDH), Saudi Arabia. A structured questionnaire covering demographic data, dental implant history, and WID usage patterns was administered. Results: Most participants were female (75.4%) and of Saudi nationality (88.6%). While 73% were aware of WID, only 34.1% used them. Of the users, 51.4% chose these devices for a sense of cleanliness, 41.7% for their convenience, and 45.8% followed their doctor's recommendation. Non‐Saudi participants were less likely (12.5%) to use WID compared to Saudis (36.9%) ( p = 0.0021). While not reaching statistical significance, income levels appeared to affect usage, with a greater likelihood of usage among higher earners. Conclusion: This study reveals a discrepancy between awareness and actual use of water irrigation devices among dental implant patients. This underscores the need for enhanced patient education and professional guidance in water irrigation device usage for dental implant care. Future research should focus on patient perceptions and compare them with clinical outcomes for evidence‐based dental practices.

Aims: Interdental papilla loss produces unaesthetic “black triangles” that impair function and patient satisfaction. While surgical and non-surgical techniques exist, hyaluronic acid (HA) injections have emerged as a minimally invasive option, but their comparative effectiveness and certainty of evidence remain unclear. This systematic review aimed to evaluate the clinical outcomes of injectable HA for interdental papilla reconstruction. Materials and methods: MEDLINE/PubMed and EMBASE were searched from inception through May 2025 for peer-reviewed randomized and non-randomized trials, cohort studies, or split-mouth designs in adults aged 18 years or older. Eligible studies compared injectable HA to surgical (e.g., connective tissue grafts) or non-surgical approaches (e.g., platelet-rich fibrin, saline placebo). The risk of bias was assessed using Cochrane RoB 2.0 and the ROBINS-I tool. Where appropriate, meta-analyses were performed, and heterogeneity was evaluated using the I ² statistic. Results: Three trials ( n = 39; 138 papillae) were included. Compared with saline, HA reduced the surface area of black triangles (SABT) (MD: −43.0 mm ² ), increased papilla height (MD 0.22 mm), and improved patient satisfaction (MD: 17 VAS points). However, comparisons with active regenerative comparators showed no statistically significant differences. Quantitative synthesis was limited by very high heterogeneity ( I ² up to 97%), small sample sizes, and methodological concerns; all included trials were judged to have some concerns regarding risk of bias. Discussion: Hyaluronic acid offers short-term esthetic improvements over placebo, but evidence certainty is low to moderate, and no clear superiority over other regenerative approaches was demonstrated. Substantial heterogeneity and limited methodological robustness limit the confidence in quantitative conclusions. Conclusions: Injectable HA may improve interdental papilla esthetics in the short term compared with placebo; however, its clinical advantage over other regenerative materials remains uncertain. Given the high heterogeneity, small sample sizes, and risk of bias, larger, well-designed randomized trials with standardized protocols and longer follow-up are required before firm clinical recommendations can be made. Systematic Review Registration: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/view/CRD420251051629 , identifier CRD420251051629.