Preface
Maurcio G. Araujo Extraction sockets: biology and
Christoph H. F. Hammerle
Massimo Simion
treatment options
Corresponding author: Linking Science with Practice is the guid-
Maurcio G. Araujo, DDS, MSc, PhD
Rua Silva Jardim
ing principle of the Osteology Foundation.
n.15/sala 03 The sixth Osteology Expert Meeting, which
CEP 87013-190 Maringa Parana took place in Zurich, Switzerland, in June
Brazil
e-mail: odomar@hotmail.com 2011 was once again devoted to this motto.
The aim of the meeting was to formulate
statements and recommendations in the field
Conflicts of interest
The authors declare no conflict of interest. of regeneration based on the current evidence.
The Scientific Committee of the Osteology
Foundation chose three main topics for the
Expert Meeting, all concerning further treat-
ment after tooth extraction:
Ridge alterations following tooth extraction
Treatment strategies to preserve the ridge
following tooth extraction
Immediate/early/delayed implant place-
ment
Thirteen experts in the field of regeneration
and implantology from eight countries formed
the Osteology Consensus Group and attended
the discussions and the formulation of the
statements: Mauricio Araujo, Maringa, Par-
ana, Brazil; Dieter Bosshardt, Daniel Buser,
Berne, Switzerland; William V. Giannobile,
Ann Arbor, Michighan, USA; Reinhard Gru-
ber, Vienna, Austria; Christoph H.F. Ham-
merle, Ronald Jung, Zurich, Switzerland;
Niklaus P. Lang, Hong Kong SAR PRC; Myron
Nevins, Boston, Massachusetts, USA; Fried-
rich Neukam, Nuremberg, Germany; Mariano
Sanz, Madrid, Spain; Massimo Simion,
Milano, Italy; Georg Watzek, Vienna, Austria.
The current evidence was condensed in four
systematic reviews prepared for the meeting.
Niklaus Langs group wrote two systematic
reviews both on the biology of socket healing
and on the immediate insertion of implants
after tooth extraction (Lang et al., Tan et al.).
Mariano Sanzs group prepared two systematic
reviews, one about ridge preservation tech-
niques and one about early versus delayed
implantation (Sanz et al., Vignoletti et al.).
To cite this article:
Clin. Oral. Implants. Res. 23(Suppl. 5), 2012, iv
doi: 10.1111/j.1600-0501.2011.02403.x
2011 John Wiley & Sons A/S
All systematic reviews were both presented
at the meeting and sent to the audience in
advance in order to establish an equal state
of knowledge amongst the participants and to
promote discussion of the results. To clarify
their approach, the reviewers explained thor-
oughly how the literature research was con-
ducted and what their inclusion and
exclusion criteria for studies were. After-
wards they presented their results and made
clear which conclusions they drew.
One important aim of the meeting was the
formulation of recommendations for the daily
use of preservation, augmentation and
implantation techniques regarding the extrac-
tion socket. Although systematic reviews
provide us with the most evidence-based
form of knowledge, clinical experience and
patient expectations also play an important
part in decision making. It was a major inter-
est of the participants to integrate these fac-
tors into the recommendations and the
formulation of questions for further research.
In this special issue of Clinical Oral
Implants Research the results of the four sys-
tematic reviews and the consensus state-
ments and recommendations are presented.
Our thanks go to the reviewers who pre-
pared the state of evidence in the areas of
ridge alteration/ridge preservation and
implant placement. Our grateful thanks also
go to all the participants of the Expert
Meeting for their important and useful com-
ments on the reviews, statements and rec-
ommendations. Particular appreciation is
given to Niklaus P. Lang, editor-in-chief of
Clinical Oral Implants Research, who initi-
ated the publication of the results in this
journal and to the Osteology Foundation for
organizing the Expert Meeting and thus
facilitating communication on this impor-
tant subject pertinent to contemporary
implant dentistry.
iv