Background: Tooth loss causes alveolar bone resorption, which may hinder the ability of implant placement. Socket preservation with immediate implant placement is one of the methods used to reduce bone resorption. In this retrospective study, we evaluated the influence of the use of dense polytetrafluoroethylene (d-PTFE) membranes on alveolar preservation after tooth extraction and with the installation of immediate dental implants. Methods: In this retrospective study, one hundred and four patients were divided into two groups: immediate implant and gap filling with heterogenous bone graft (control group, 52 patients) or immediate implant, gap filling with heterogenous bone graft, and covering with a d-PTFE membrane with dimensions of 12 × 24 mm, which was intentionally left exposed to the oral cavity (test group, 52 patients). Tomographic data were obtained before and 12 months after the surgical procedures. Results: The membranes exposed in the oral cavity showed no infection. Volumetric analyses revealed a statistically significant difference in alveolar ridge resorption for the control and d-PTFE groups, 16.75% and 4.55%, respectively. Conclusions: Intentionally exposed d-PTFE membranes showed minimal complications. Based on the volumetric results, alveolar ridge preservation with d-PTFE membranes was superior to the bone graft alone in immediate implant placement.

Background: Peri‐implantitis is a biofilm‐induced inflammatory condition with challenging management due to the complexity of implant surface topographies and the polymicrobial and well‐structured profile of the biofilm colonizing these surfaces. Adjunctive use of antibiotics has been explored to enhance the outcomes of both surgical and non‐surgical therapies, but its impact remains questionable. Objective: To critically evaluate the clinical effects of systemic and local antibiotic therapies, combined with mechanical debridement (MD), in the surgical and non‐surgical treatments for peri‐implantitis. Material and Methods: Five databases and gray literature were systematically searched through March 2026. Twenty‐one studies involving 1,718 implants were included. Pairwise and network meta‐analyses were conducted using random‐effects models to compare the efficacy of antibiotic regimens on clinical parameters, including probing pocket depth (PPD), clinical attachment level (CAL), bleeding on probing (BoP), plaque index (PLI), and marginal bone loss (MBL). Results: Systemic metronidazole combined with amoxicillin was most effective in reducing PPD and MBL, especially when used in the surgical treatment of peri‐implantitis. For non‐surgical intervention, metronidazole demonstrated the most effective results, particularly for CAL and MBL. Minocycline microspheres and the combination of amoxicillin and metronidazole showed the best results among local therapies. Overall, antibiotics improved clinical parameters when compared to mechanical debridement alone, but with substantial microbiological variability depending on the delivery method and intervention type. Conclusion: The most effective treatments were metronidazole as adjunct to non‐surgical treatment and combined with amoxicillin adjuncts to open flap debridement. While local antibiotic applications also enhance clinical parameters, they appear less effective than systemic regimens. Future well‐designed clinical trials focusing on microbiological outcomes and standardized protocols are warranted to optimize periimplantitis management strategies.

Objective: This study aimed to assess radiographic marginal bone changes 22 months post extraction, which is 1 year after implant loading in alveolar ridge preservation (ARP) sites grafted with a combination of collagen‐embedded xenogenic bone substitute (DBBM‐C) and collagen matrix (CMX), comparing them with implants placed in naturally healed sites.Methods: This randomized controlled clinical trial was conducted over 22 months. Patients who needed a single tooth extraction and subsequent implant placement in nonmolar areas were enrolled. The test group received deproteinized bovine bone mineral with 10% collagen covered by a procaine collagen membrane, while the control group allowed spontaneous healing. Radiographic bone level changes were documented using periapical radiographs at implant placement and follow‐up visits (6, 10, and 22 months postextraction). Early implant soft tissue exposure, clinical parameters, and patient‐reported outcomes were recorded.Results: Twenty‐two out of 28 participants completed a 22‐month follow‐up, 9 in the test group and 13 in the control group. At 10‐month postextraction follow‐up, the mean MBL was 1.01 ± 1.04 mm in the treatment group and 0.81 ± 0.93 mm in the control group (p = 0.804). At 22 months, the mean MBL was 2.09 ± 1.03 mm in the treatment group and 1.58 ± 0.73 mm in the control group (p = 0.339). No statistically significant differences in probing depth (PD) and bleeding on probing (BOP) were found at the 22 ‐month follow‐up as well. Soft tissue mean recession was observed in the control group (0.36 ± 0.84 mm), while no recession was found in the test group (p = 0.2). Early implant soft tissue exposure occurred in 33% of test group participants, while none was observed in the control group (p = 0.047).Conclusion: One year after implant loading, no significant differences in marginal bone resorption were found between implants placed in ARP‐treated and naturally healed sites. However, ARP‐treated sites exhibited early implant soft‐tissue exposure, suggesting a possible impairment in soft tissue healing.

This study investigated the effect of platelet-rich fibrin (PRF) on bone healing around implants placed in elevated sinus cavities. Forty New Zealand albino rabbits were divided into eight groups, based on the time of sacrifice (14 or 40 days) and the material used: blood clot (control), hydroxyapatite (HA) from bovine bone, HA combined with PRF, and PRF alone. Each group consisted of five animals (n = 5). A histological analysis measured bone-to-implant contact (BIC) and bone area fraction occupancy (BAFO). The results showed significant increases in the BIC and BAFO values at 40 days compared to 14 days in most groups. At day 14, the HA+PRF group had higher BIC than the clot and the PRF alone groups. At 40 days, HA+PRF maintained the highest BIC across all groups (p < 0.05), though it did not show an advantage for BAFO. These findings indicate that combining HA with PRF promotes better osseointegration around implants placed immediately in maxillary sinus augmentation. Given the limited research on PRF’s biological impact, these results underscore the importance of evaluating PRF’s role in peri-implant healing and its potential benefits for clinical use in sinus augmentation.