Periodontitis and cardiovascular disease share inflammatory, immune, endothelial, oxidative, and lipid-related pathways. Although sex-related differences are well established for many cardiovascular biomarkers, it remains unclear whether sex modifies biomarker patterns at the intersection of periodontal and cardiovascular disease. PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science were searched in accordance with PRISMA 2020. Eligible adult human studies evaluated periodontitis or periodontal inflammation together with atherosclerotic or related cardiovascular phenotypes and reported candidate biomarkers in blood or, as supportive evidence, oral fluids. High-throughput omics studies were eligible when available. Data on study design, periodontal and cardiovascular assessment, biological matrix, biomarker findings, sex-stratified analyses, and menopausal status were extracted. Twelve studies were included. Most assessed single biomarkers or small predefined panels rather than discovery-scale omics. Reported markers involved inflammation and immunity (CRP, hs-CRP, IL-6, LPS, and periodontal antibodies), endothelial or vascular injury, lipid and autoimmune pathways (PCSK9 and anti-ApoA-1 IgG), innate-immune and metabolic regulation (MBL and SIRT1), cardiac stress, and oxidative stress. Findings were heterogeneous across cardiovascular phenotypes, and several key associations were null or imprecise. Only two studies performed direct male–female comparisons: one enrolled women only, and none stratified women by menopausal status. No study derived and validated a sex-specific omics signature. The literature identifies overlapping candidate-biomarker pathways but does not establish a causal, clinically validated, sex-specific, or menopause-specific signature of periodontitis-associated cardiovascular disease. The current evidence should be considered hypothesis-generating.

Background: The management of complete mandibular edentulism in frail patients with severe bone atrophy is a clinical challenge. Ultrashort implants (≤4 mm) have been proposed as a minimally invasive alternative to bone augmentation procedures; however, long-term evidence in full-arch rehabilitations remains limited. Methods: This retrospective single-center cohort study presents the 10-year follow-up of patients treated with full-arch mandibular rehabilitation under immediate loading supported by 4 mm ultrashort implants. Patients were originally treated between 2015 and 2017. The primary outcome was prosthetic success at 10 years, defined as a stable and functional prosthesis supported by four implants. Secondary outcomes included implant survival, timing of implant loss, and biological and prosthetic complications. Results: Fourteen patients were available for evaluation at the 10-year follow-up. The success of the prosthetic structure was 100%, with all patients maintaining stable and functional rehabilitation. As regards the implants, a total of 82 implants had been placed, with 14 implant losses, resulting in a cumulative implant survival rate of 82.9%. Implant losses occurred mainly in early (1 week, 4 months) and late phases (between 3 and 10 years), while no losses were observed between 1 and 3 years. Overall, 71.43% of patients experienced at least one implant loss; however, this did not compromise prosthetic function. Conclusions: In this retrospective cohort, all full-arch prostheses remained functional at 10 years, although cumulative implant survival was 82.9%. These findings suggest that rehabilitation supported by 4 mm ultrashort implants may represent a treatment option for carefully selected frail patients with severe mandibular atrophy. Prospective controlled studies are needed to confirm these findings and compare this approach with standard-length implants and bone augmentation procedures.

Background: Dental caries is one of the most prevalent chronic conditions worldwide, significantly affecting public health and individual quality of life. Orthodontic treatments, particularly fixed appliances, may increase caries risk due to plaque retention and changes in the oral microbiota. Clear aligners, such as Invisalign®, represent a removable alternative that may facilitate oral hygiene and oral health. however, their impact on caries development remains a question to be investigate to understand the real opportunity in treating patients reducing the risk of caries. Objective: To systematically evaluate the effect of clear aligner therapy on dental caries risk and cariological outcomes compared with fixed or traditional removable orthodontic appliances. Methods: A systematic literature search was conducted up to June 2025 in PubMed/MEDLINE and Web of Science. Original clinical studies comparing clear aligners with fixed or traditional removable appliances were included according to predefined PICOS criteria. Outcomes of interest included DMFT scores, caries incidence, white spot lesions, enamel demineralization, and cariogenic bacterial profiles. Study selection and data extraction were performed independently by two reviewers, with disagreements resolved by a third reviewer. Risk of bias was assessed using ROBINS-I. Results: Three studies met the inclusion criteria (two case–control studies and one prospective cohort study). Two case–control studies reported a significantly greater increase in DMFT scores in patients treated with fixed appliances compared with clear aligners, while no significant differences in proximal caries incidence were observed. The cohort study found no significant differences in salivary levels of Streptococcus mutans and Lactobacilli between treatment modalities. Overall, no evidence of an increased caries risk associated with clear aligners was identified; however, the certainty of evidence was low. Conclusion: Clear aligner therapy does not appear to be associated with a higher risk of dental caries compared with fixed or traditional removable appliances. Nevertheless, the limited number of studies and their methodological limitations highlight the need for well-designed prospective investigations with standardized caries outcomes.

Background: Treatment of peri-implantitis remains challenging because biofilm removal from microstructured implant surfaces is often incomplete. The present study is an uncontrolled, prospective feasibility case series involving six patients (six implants), not a controlled clinical trial, in which short-term clinical outcomes following use of a multimodal protocol to decontaminate the titanium implant surface were obtained; consequently, the independent contribution of the Ximplant^® device to the observed outcomes cannot be determined. The protocol comprised surgical access, mechanical debridement, chemical conditioning, systemic administration of medication, and cleaning with an alternating-current device (Ximplant^®; LED, S.p.A., Aprilia, Italy). Methods: Six adults with peri-implantitis, each contributing one implant, were consecutively treated using the multimodal protocol. Probing depth (PD), bleeding on probing (BOP), plaque index (PI), and suppuration (SU) were determined at baseline, 3 weeks, 6 months, and 12 months. Longitudinal changes were analyzed using repeated-measures analysis of variance and non-parametric tests for categorical variables. Results: Mean total PD decreased from 4.56 ± 0.45 mm at baseline to 3.03 ± 0.44 mm at the 3-week follow-up and remained stable at the 6-month follow-up (3.08 ± 0.35 mm) and at 12-month follow-up (3.19 ± 0.41 mm; p < 0.0001). BOP and SU were absent in all implants at each follow-up visit. PI improved markedly, although the buccal aspect of one implant was PI-positive at the 3-week and the 12-month follow-up. Conclusions: The multimodal protocol used in this study was associated with rapid and sustained clinical improvement over the 12-month follow-up period. A study limitation is that because the individual parts of the protocol were applied concurrently, the independent contribution of any of them to the outcomes determined could not be isolated.