Materials

Journal Browser

► Journal Browser

Biomaterials in Periodontology and Implant Dentistry

Share This Special Issue

Special Issue Editors

Dr. Marco Annunziata

E-Mail Website
Guest Editor

Multidisciplinary Department of Medical-Surgical and Dental Specialties, University of Campania “Luigi Vanvitelli”, 80138 Naples, Italy
Interests: periodontology; periodontal diseases; implant dentistry; peri-implant diseases
Special Issues, Collections and Topics in MDPI journals

Dr. Gennaro Cecoro

E-Mail Website
Guest Editor

Special Issue Information

Dear Colleagues,

In recent years, growing attention has been paid to the development of materials in the fields of both periodontology and implant dentistry. Dental implants with modified surfaces are a solid acquisition in dental implantology; however, research efforts continue to be made to continuously develop higher performing materials for both the endosseous and transmucosal parts of dental implants. The characteristics of dental implants’ (and their components) materials greatly influence their performance both in terms of osseointegration and integration with soft tissues. This aspect is still a main concern in implant research since these materials can influence the maintenance of peri-implant health in the long term. Furthermore, biomaterials for both periodontal and peri-implant regeneration represent a research field of great interest for both clinicians and developers since they are routinely adopted in daily clinical practice. This Special Issue aims to highlight the latest news regarding these topics and provide new insights for future research in the field. Both pre-clinical and clinical research, but also review articles, regarding materials of dental implants, their components, and biomaterials for periodontal and peri-implant regeneration are welcome for submission.

Dr. Marco Annunziata
Dr. Gennaro Cecoro
Guest Editors

Manuscript Submission Information

Manuscripts should be submitted online at www.mdpi.com by registering and logging in to this website. Once you are registered, click here to go to the submission form. Manuscripts can be submitted until the deadline. All submissions that pass pre-check are peer-reviewed. Accepted papers will be published continuously in the journal (as soon as accepted) and will be listed together on the special issue website. Research articles, review articles as well as short communications are invited. For planned papers, a title and short abstract (about 100 words) can be sent to the Editorial Office for announcement on this website.

Submitted manuscripts should not have been published previously, nor be under consideration for publication elsewhere (except conference proceedings papers). All manuscripts are thoroughly refereed through a single-blind peer-review process. A guide for authors and other relevant information for submission of manuscripts is available on the Instructions for Authors page. Materials is an international peer-reviewed open access semimonthly journal published by MDPI.

Please visit the Instructions for Authors page before submitting a manuscript. The Article Processing Charge (APC) for publication in this open access journal is 2600 CHF (Swiss Francs). Submitted papers should be well formatted and use good English. Authors may use MDPI's English editing service prior to publication or during author revisions.

Benefits of Publishing in a Special Issue

Ease of navigation: Grouping papers by topic helps scholars navigate broad scope journals more efficiently.

Greater discoverability: Special Issues support the reach and impact of scientific research. Articles in Special Issues are more discoverable and cited more frequently.

Expansion of research network: Special Issues facilitate connections among authors, fostering scientific collaborations.

External promotion: Articles in Special Issues are often promoted through the journal's social media, increasing their visibility.

Reprint: MDPI Books provides the opportunity to republish successful Special Issues in book format, both online and in print.

Further information on MDPI's Special Issue policies can be found here.

Published Papers (2 papers)

Download All Papers

Order results

Result details

Show export options Show export options

Select all

Export citation of selected articles as:

Research

12 pages, 1642 KiB

Open AccessArticle

A Comparison of the Dimensional Characteristics and Plasma Parameters of Different Centrifuges Used for the Preparation of Autologous Platelet Concentrates: A Randomized Correlational Study

by Leandro Lécio de Lima Sousa, Daiana Fermiano Brunale, Gustavo Vicentis Oliveira Fernandes, Gabriela Giro and Marcelo Faveri

Materials 2025, 18(2), 414; https://doi.org/10.3390/ma18020414 - 17 Jan 2025

Viewed by 662

Abstract

Objective: The objective of this study was to evaluate autologous platelet-rich fibrin (PRF) membrane weights and measurements after production by different centrifuges. Moreover, the values obtained with blood cellular components were correlated. Methods: Twelve systemically healthy participants underwent dental implant surgery associated with PRF membranes as the graft biomaterial at the implant site. Prior to the surgical procedure, the chosen participants underwent blood count and coagulogram tests and presented on the surgical day. Nine tubes containing 10 mL of venous blood were collected from each individual. The tubes were randomly distributed and positioned in three different centrifuges: (C1) the Intra-lock L-PRF Process, (C2) the Kasvi Digital, and (C3) the PRF Montserrat. PRF membrane processing was carried out as described by each manufacturer. After the processing steps, the prepared wet PRFs (initial) were placed in the container (box) designated by the manufacturer for the obtention of PRF membranes. The weights and measurements of the “wet” PRFs (initial) and membranes (final) were obtained using a precision scale and digital caliper in an aseptic environment. The data were compared, and the statistical differences were analyzed using the Friedman test and the Dunn post hoc test; Pearson correlation tests were performed between macroscopic data and data from serum tests; statistical significance was set at 5% (p < 0.05). Results: 108 blood collection tubes were collected. The average harvest time for each tube individually was 21.5 ± 9.9 s. The average time for blood collection (nine tubes) from each of the 12 individuals was 193.1 ± 72.4 s (p = 0.728). The average values were very similar between the centrifuges, both for the measurements and weights of the “plugs” as well as for the linear measurements (p > 0.05). Regarding the wet weights and the linear averages of the PRF membranes, it was observed that the wet PRF weights varied from 0.22 to 0.25 mg and the linear measurements from 24.1 to 26.7 mm, with no statistical differences between centrifuges (p > 0.05). The data presented by centrifuges C1 and C2 were more homogeneous, delivering a value of less than 25% variability compared to the C3 centrifuge, which achieved values greater than 33%. Conclusions: The proposed macroscopic dimensional evaluation found no differences between the autologous platelet concentrates obtained by different centrifuges, and no correlation was found between these PRFs and the patients’ blood counts. Full article

(This article belongs to the Special Issue Biomaterials in Periodontology and Implant Dentistry)

► Show Figures

Figure 1

13 pages, 2403 KiB

Open AccessArticle

Treatment of Localized Gingival Recession with an Enamel Matrix Protein-Coated Xenogeneic Dermal Matrix: A Randomized Controlled Trial

by Marcus Rieder, Gernot Wimmer, Alwin Sokolowski, Armin Sokolowski, Michael Payer and Behrouz Arefnia

Materials 2024, 17(16), 3985; https://doi.org/10.3390/ma17163985 - 10 Aug 2024

Viewed by 1825

Abstract

This study aims to evaluate the influence of the additional use of enamel matrix derivate (EMD) in the treatment of gingival recession defects using a coronally advanced flap (CAF) and a xenogeneic dermal matrix (XDM) by means of digital and clinical assessment methods. In this prospective randomized controlled study, recession height and area, width and thickness of keratinized gingiva, pocket probing depth, and clinical attachment levels were measured at the baseline and followed up for one year. Fifteen patients (n = 15) with 24 gingival recession defects were treated between 2019 and 2021. On average, the digitally assessed root coverage of the control group (CAF + XDM) was not significantly different compared to the test group (CAF + XDM + EMD), with 69 ± 28% and 36 ± 32%, respectively (p = 0.094). One year postoperatively, there were no differences found regarding keratinized tissue width (KTW) between the control group and test group (p = 0.690). However, the control group showed superior results in the thickness of keratinized gingiva (p = 0.044). The present study showed that there were no statistically significant differences in the root coverage results in the CAF + XDM + EMD group compared to the CAF + XDM group. The adjunctive use of EMD to a CAF and XDM in the treatment of gingival recession defects does not appear to have any clinical benefit. Full article

(This article belongs to the Special Issue Biomaterials in Periodontology and Implant Dentistry)

► Show Figures

Journal Menu

Journal Browser

Biomaterials in Periodontology and Implant Dentistry

Share This Special Issue

Special Issue Editors

Special Issue Information

Keywords

Benefits of Publishing in a Special Issue

Published Papers (2 papers)

Research

Further Information

Guidelines

MDPI Initiatives

Follow MDPI