Peri-implantitis is an inflammatory disease-causing bone loss around dental implants, often requiring reconstructive surgical therapies to reduce probing depth and regenerate bone. However, such surgeries are frequently complicated by postoperative issues. This retrospective case series aimed to identify the main postoperative complications following the reconstructive treatment of peri-implant bone defects in peri-implantitis patients. Data from 14 patients with 21 affected implants were analyzed, including demographics, oral hygiene, surgical techniques, and complications such as wound dehiscence, membrane exposure, and infections. Wound dehiscence was measured using Image J^® software version 1.54. Descriptive and bivariate analyses were performed. The results showed that 11 implants (52.4%; 95% confidence interval (95%CI): 29% to 76%) in nine patients (57.1%; 95%CI = 27% to 87%) developed soft tissue dehiscence after one week, with membrane exposure observed in 4 implants. Dehiscence was significantly associated with mandibular implant location (p = 0.003), poor interproximal hygiene (p = 0.008), and membrane exposure (p = 0.034). No postoperative infections were recorded. In conclusion, more than half of peri-implantitis patients undergoing reconstructive surgery experience wound dehiscence, particularly in cases involving mandible, poor hygiene, and membrane exposure. This complication might compromise bone regeneration and reduce the treatment success rate. These results should be interpreted cautiously due to study design limitations (retrospective design, lack of a control group, and small sample size).

The microbiota associated with peri-implant diseases has been described, though information about biofilm formation and development on dental implants remains scarce. To analyze and compare biofilm formation and distribution at 24 h, 48 h and 7 days on experimental abutments simulating dental implants in peri-implant healthy patients. Experimental abutments with micro-threads and a modified rough surface were placed in healthy dental implants of 10 patients. Instructions were given not to clean the abutments for the duration of the study. Exclusion criteria included the use of antiseptics or antibiotics 30 days prior to recruitment or during the study period. After 24 h, 48 h and 7 days, the abutments were removed and stained using LIVE/DEAD stain, and two sides (buccal and palatal/lingual) and two areas (supragingival and subgingival) were assessed, with measurement of the mean biofilm covering area. Twenty-nine experimental abutments placed in 10 patients were assessed. The total mean biomass coverage areas were 9.3%, 16.2% and 16.8% at 24 h, 48 h and 7 days, respectively, with significant differences being observed between 24 h and the subsequent timepoints (p < 0.05). Significantly greater supragingival biofilm coverage was observed at 7 days in comparison with the subgingival zone (21.85% versus 11.7%; p < 0.05). Biofilm coverage on healthy dental implants increases progressively during the first 48 h and then stabilizes. The biofilm is mainly composed of live cells in the supragingival and subgingival areas. After 7 days, the supragingival areas show significantly greater biofilm coverage.

Objectives: This study aimed to compare vertical bone gain (VBG) and horizontal bone gain (HBG) after guided bone regeneration using titanium-reinforced dense PTFE (TiR-dPTFE) versus reinforced PTFE mesh (RPM) at 9 and 12 months on three-dimensional tomographic imaging, and to perform histological assessment in selected cases. Materials and Methods: This prospective comparative case series included 14 patients (46 vertical ridge defect sites) treated with guided bone regeneration using either Ti-reinforced dPTFE membranes (TiR-dPTFE; n = 23) or resorbable porcine collagen membranes (RPM; n = 23). All sites received a 60:40 mixture of autogenous bone chips and anorganic bovine bone mineral (ABBM). After 9 months, during implant placement, a protective secondary augmentation using a 70:30 ABBM/autogenous mixture was performed and covered with a collagen membrane. Vertical and horizontal bone gain (VBG, HBG) were assessed on standardized matched CBCT cross-sections obtained at 9 and 12 months. Core biopsies were harvested at implant placement (9 months) for histological evaluation. Surgical and healing complications were recorded. Results: Both membranes produced significant VBG. TiR-dPTFE achieved greater VBG than RPM at 9 months (p = 0.045) and 12 months (p = 0.012) and remained stable from 9 to 12 months, whereas RPM showed a significant decline over time (MDa −0.48 mm; 95% CI −0.64 to −0.31; p < 0.001). HBG was similar between groups at both time points (p = 0.918 and p = 0.922). No major clinical complications occurred. Histology at 9 months confirmed vital bone formation and graft integration in both groups. Conclusions: Both TiR-dPTFE and RPM are reliable options for vertical ridge augmentation; TiR-dPTFE yielded superior and more stable vertical gains over 12 months, with comparable horizontal outcomes. Clinical Relevance: TiR-dPTFE may offer enhanced vertical augmentation, while both membranes remain suitable for implant site development.