Search

Human body dissection was a ubiquitous practice in the past, to better understand anatomy and to develop medicine. Today, its role could still be important to answer everyday clinical queries and help surgeons. The example of the possible lack of anesthesia during symphysis surgeries can emphasize the usefulness of dissection. The mandibular symphysis usually receives innervation from inferior alveolar nerve terminations, but, in some rare cases, a particular anastomosis involves the lingual nerve and the nerve to the mylohyoid. The anatomical knowledge resulting from body dissections could help oral surgeons to understand the reason why the patient could feel pain during the surgery, and ensure performance of the right lingual nerve block to obtain complete anesthesia. This clinical situation shows the educational role of an ancient, yet still valid, practice, human dissection, and the importance of anatomical studies to improve surgical skills, to provide better treatment for the patient.

Background: Retrograde peri-implantitis (RPI) is a pathological entity with an unclear etiology (e.g., overheating during implant insertion, residual infection of the tooth replaced by the implant or the endodontic lesion of neighboring teeth) and an extremely low prevalence and has been scarcely investigated. Therefore, the aim of this cross-sectional survey was to evaluate the knowledge and attitude of Italian implantologists regarding RPI. Methods: An anonymous questionnaire was sent via email to implantologists randomly selected, including a section about demographic information and questions related to RPI origin, radiographic representation, symptoms and treatment options. All questions were multiple answer and close-ended. Binomial logistic regression was performed to investigate the relationship between correct answers and the following independent variables: age, years of experience and number of dental implants placed per year. Results: In total, 475 implantologists completed the questionnaire, with a response rate of 46.3%. Based on the results of the study, incorrect answers were associated with less experienced participants (&lt, 80 implants/year) for all questions evaluated, with the exception of treatment strategies. Furthermore, 26.7% of the survey takers did not recognize radiographic representation of RPI and 35.5% picked &ldquo, implant removal&rdquo, when asked about treatment modality. Conclusions: The majority of participants were able to recognize symptoms and indicated the probable causes of RPI, however, around 30% of them showed very limited knowledge of available management strategies.