Aims: To evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of periapical, bitewing or panoramic radiographs (standard 2D radiographs) in detecting and monitoring periodontitis (PICO 1) and to assess the clinical relevance of alternative and emerging diagnostic methods (e.g., cone‐beam computed tomography [CBCT], magnetic resonance imaging [MRI], ultrasound imaging [USG]) compared to standard 2D radiographs or clinical/intra‐surgical examination in the diagnosis and surveillance of the disease (PICO 2). Materials and Methods: A systematic literature search was conducted through MEDLINE EMBASE, Scopus and Cochrane Library. When feasible ( n > 2 comparable studies), a meta‐analysis of diagnostic accuracy was performed. Results: For PICO 1, 26 studies met the inclusion criteria. Pooled‐data analysis from three studies showed a sensitivity of 0.77 (95% confidence interval, CI: 0.66–0.85), specificity of 0.76 (95% CI: 0.64–0.84) and accuracy of 0.82, with a diagnostic odds ratio (DOR) of 137.99 (95% CI: 6.99–368.90). For PICO 2, 51 articles were included dealing with different techniques. The meta‐analysis for CBCT (three studies) showed a pooled sensitivity and specificity of 0.98 (95% CI: 0.96–1.00) and 0.98 (95% CI: 0.95–1.00), respectively, and a diagnostic accuracy of 0.99 in the detection of furcation involvement compared to intra‐surgical measurements. Conclusions: Standard 2D radiographs appear to have adequate diagnostic accuracy for periodontitis, while CBCT is highly sensitive and specific to detect and classify furcation involvement. The role of non‐ionizing techniques (MRI and USG) in diagnosing periodontitis remains under investigation.

Aim: To evaluate the impact of ultra‐processed foods reduction advice (UPF‐RA) on gingivitis treatment and dietary patterns. Methods: Young adults with gingivitis were randomly assigned to two groups. At baseline, test group participants received UPF‐RA. At 8 weeks, professional mechanical plaque removal (PMPR) was carried out, followed by UPF‐RA (test group only). Full‐mouth periodontal charting and dietary data, collected through the NOVA Food Frequency Questionnaire and the Medi‐Lite, were recorded at baseline and at 8 and 16 weeks. Results: Sixty‐six patients (mean age: 23.3 ± 2.3 years; 32 males and 34 females) were included. At 8 weeks, a significant reduction in full‐mouth bleeding score (FMBS) was observed in the test group (18.9% ± 8.6% to 14.6% ± 9.0%; p = 0.04), with a concomitant decrease in UPF intake (912.7 ± 511.3 kcal to 446.9 ± 264.6 kcal; p < 0.001). No significant changes in FMBS and UPF consumption were observed in the control group (19.8% ± 9.0% to 19.1% ± 8.6%, p = 0.93; 776.4 ± 453.6 kcal to 775.3 ± 451.03, p = 1.00, respectively). At 16 weeks, gingivitis was resolved in 24% more cases in the test group. Logistic regression identified low UPF intake and UPF‐RA as significant predictors of FMBS reduction. Conclusions: Reduction in UPF consumption improved gingivitis treatment outcomes and participants' dietary quality. Patients with higher UPF consumption showed higher bleeding scores.

Background: Implant‐prosthetic characteristics jeopardize accurate diagnosis, professional and domiciliary plaque control around dental implants. Accurate prosthetic design planning and prosthetic features modifications are fundamental in peri‐implant diseases’ primordial prevention and active treatment. Objectives: To evaluate the impact of prosthetic emergence angles (EAs) and mucosal tunnel depths (MTDs) on the efficacy of ultrasonic debridement in removing ink stain simulating artificial biofilm in an in vitro model. Methods: An in vitro model simulating biofilm around implant abutment, incorporating a 4 mm implant analog replicating a missing single tooth was designed. Titanium abutments with three MTDs (2, 4, and 6 mm) were associated with individualized crowns with different EAs (15°, 30°, and 45°), resulting in nine experimental groups. Abutments were stained with artificial biofilm and subsequently instrumented through ultrasonic debridement. The proportion of residual biofilm (ResB) was quantified and evaluated for the four surfaces. Results: A total of 360 images of 90 instrumented abutments was evaluated. The overall means described a consistent increase of ResB in relation to the progressive increment of both MTD and EA. Mesial and distal surfaces presented more biofilm across all EA‐MTD combinations ( p < 0.05). Logistic regression models pinpointed MTD and EA as significant predictors. The 6 mm MTD and 45° EA combination demonstrated as the strongest predictor (odds ratio [OR] = 134,33). Conclusions: The combination of a progressively wider prosthetic EA and a deeper mucosal tunnel significantly reduced the efficacy of submucosal instrumentation. Narrower EA (<30°) and shallower MTD (<4 mm) yielded significantly better results in terms of ResB.

Methods: Currently available randomized controlled clinical trials (RCTs) reporting on the adjunctive clinical effects of biomaterials, grafting materials, and grafting techniques on immediate implant placement (IIP) were systematically assessed. Data were qualitatively analyzed and, when appropriate, meta-analysis was performed. Risk of bias and quality of evidence were evaluated using the Cochrane RoB 2 tool and the GRADE framework, respectively. Results: A total of 12 RCTs (484 implants, 6–36 months of follow-up) were included and consistently reported high implant survival rates (96–100%). Data on the use of xenografts, alloplastic and mixed grafts, connective tissue grafts and socket shield technique seem, to different extents, to demonstrate favorable results in terms of peri-implant hard and soft tissue dynamics and esthetic outcomes. Quantitative synthesis conducted on four RCTs demonstrated significantly higher short-term patient-reported postoperative pain, assessed on a 0–100 Visual Analog Scale (VAS) (weighted mean difference 19.45 mm; 95% CI 0.55–38.36; p = 0.04). Most RCTs were rated at moderate to high risk of bias, and certainty of evidence was low to moderate. Conclusions: Regardless of the use of adjunctive materials/approaches, IIP guarantees high implant survival rates. Although different adjunctive strategies to IIP may favor hard and soft tissue stability, they appear to increase short-term patient-reported morbidity. Currently available evidence lacks standardized and patient-centered outcome reporting.