Search

This case report evaluates the possible reasons for early complications after guided bone regeneration, as well as options for their management. A thorough evaluation prior to surgery will help determine appropriate planning. Each clinician should be aware of the goals and possible limitations of the treatment to be performed to ensure optimal patient care. The management of the membrane, early exposure and contamination with a second bone augmentation surgery provided a sufficient amount of bone to place a dental implant in a correct three-dimensional position. CPD/Clinical Relevance: The correct approach for the management of the complications for regenerative bone therapy is highlighted. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: To determine the comfort level and reproducibility assessment of the probing pocket depth obtained with three different probes. Methods: A cross‐sectional clinical study was conducted in accordance with the STROBE standards. Three different types of periodontal probes were selected: (1) University of North Carolina (UNC) probe, (2) World health organization (WHO) probe and (3) UNC12 COLORVUE probe. Three experienced and calibrated periodontists performed periodontal clinical assessments (probing depth) and pain assessment with the visual analogue scale (VAS). Results: The clinical evaluations were carried out in 13 volunteers who attended the dental clinic of the Universidad Científica del Sur (Lima, Peru). A total of 2106 periodontal clinical measurements were obtained (702 measurements per examiner). Each examiner evaluated 234 sites for each type of probe. When patient comfort values during the periodontal evaluation performed with the 3 types of probes were compared, the patients evaluated with the UNC12 COLORVUE probe perceived less pain with a mean value of 0.61, followed by the WHO probe and the UNC probe. When evaluating the clinical measurements, the UNC probe was observed to obtain the greatest mean depth on probing 1.4 + 0.5 mm, while with the UNC12 Colorvue probe, the values obtained were 1.1 + 0.3 mm, and with the WHO probe, 1.2 + 0.4 mm. Conclusions: Based on the periodontal probe used, experience of the examiner and the patient, we can conclude that the UNC12 Colorvue probe was the instrument that promoted the greatest comfort or the slightest response to pain, followed by the WHO probe. However, the use of the WHO probe resulted in obtaining the lowest reproducibility among depths on probing. The UNC probe produced the highest response to pain in the patients. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: A systematic review (SR) was conducted to answer the following focused question based on PICO strategy: In patients who were submitted to horizontal guided bone regeneration, "how efficacious is the combination of substitute bone graft with autogenous bone graft in comparison with substitute bone graft alone, in terms of bone gain?", Material and Methods: MEDLINE (PubMed), Scopus, Embase, Web of Science databases were searched, and hand searches were made up to June 2021, to find randomized clinical trials comparing the clinical effects of autogenous bone graft + substitute bone graft versus substitute bone graft alone in the treatment of horizontal guided bone regeneration., Results: Four trials representing 109 individuals were included. All studies included in this SR used allogeneic bone graft. The meta-analysis did not show any statistically significant difference between the groups, for horizontal bone gain at a distance of 0 mm (MD: -0.46; 95%CI: -1.03 - 0.11) or at a distance of 4 to 5 mm from the top of the crestal alveolar ridge (MD: 0.17; 95%CI: -1.08 - 1.42)., Conclusions: Within limitations of this systematic review, it was concluded that the addition of autogenous bone graft to the allogeneic bone graft did not significantly increase the quantity of regenerated bone. Key words: Bone graft, bone regeneration, allograft., Competing Interests: Conflicts of interest We declare that there are no conflicts of interests for any author with regard to this article., (Copyright: © 2022 Medicina Oral S.L.)