We use cookies to enable the functions required for this website, such as login or a shopping cart. You can find more information in our privacy policy.
Dr. Gonzalez-Martin received the DDS degree from University of Seville in 1999 and was appointed as an assistant professor at the same university from 1999 to 2005, while also working in a private practice. In 2005, he moved to Philadelphia, Pennsylvania (USA) to obtain an MS degree in Graduate Periodontics and Periodontal-Prosthesis in 2009 from University of Pennsylvania (UPenn). He received the Arnold Weisgold’s Director’s Award. He joined the UPenn faculty as an Adjunct Assistant Professor in 2009 and he currently keeps the position. He became a Diplomate of the American Board of Periodontics in 2009. In 2010, he received a scholarship to join to the Fixed Prosthodontic and Occlusion Department at the University of Geneva School of Dental Medicine. In 2015, he obtained an International PhD at the University of Seville. Currently, he serves as Editor-in-Chief for The International Journal of Periodontics & Restorative Dentistry. At present, he teaches in the graduate program of Periodontology at University Complutense of Madrid, Part-time in Restorative Dentistry and Biomaterials Sciences Harvard School of Dental Medicine while continuing work at a private practice, Atelier Dental Madrid, exclusive to periodontics, prosthesis, and implants.
Issue cycle: Bimonthly Language: English Impact factor: 1.3 (2023) Categories: Restorative Dentistry, Periodontics Editor-in-chief: Prof. Dr. Gustavo Avila-Ortiz DDS, MS, PhD, Dr. Oscar Gonzalez-Martin DDS, PhD, MSc QP USA
Details make perfection24. Oct 2024 — 26. Oct 2024MiCo - Milano Convention Centre, Milano, Italy
Speakers: Bilal Al-Nawas, Gil Alcoforado, Federico Hernández Alfaro, Sofia Aroca, Wael Att, Gustavo Avila-Ortiz, Kathrin Becker, Anne Benhamou, Juan Blanco Carrión, Dieter Bosshardt, Daniel Buser, Francesco Cairo, Paolo Casentini, Raffaele Cavalcanti, Tali Chackartchi, Renato Cocconi, Luca Cordaro, Luca De Stavola, Nuno Sousa Dias, Egon Euwe, Vincent Fehmer, Alberto Fonzar, Helena Francisco, Lukas Fürhauser, German O. Gallucci, Oscar Gonzalez-Martin, Dominik Groß, Robert Haas, Alexis Ioannidis, Simon Storgård Jensen, Ronald Jung, France Lambert, Luca Landi, Georg Mailath-Pokorny jun., Silvia Masiero, Iva Milinkovic, Carlo Monaco, Jose Nart, José M. Navarro, Katja Nelson, Manuel Nienkemper, David Nisand, Michael Payer, Sergio Piano, Bjarni E. Pjetursson, Sven Reich, Isabella Rocchietta, Giuseppe Romeo, Irena Sailer, Mariano Sanz, Ignacio Sanz Martín, Frank Schwarz, Shakeel Shahdad, Massimo Simion, Ralf Smeets, Benedikt Spies, Bogna Stawarczyk, Martina Stefanini, Hendrik Terheyden, Tiziano Testori, Daniel Thoma, Ana Torres Moneu, Piero Venezia, Lukas Waltenberger, Hom-Lay Wang, Stefan Wolfart, Giovanni Zucchelli, Otto Zuhr
European Association for Osseintegration (EAO)
International Esthetic Days
Digital excellence across disciplines19. Sep 2024 — 21. Sep 2024Palau de Congressos de Palma, Palma de Mallorca, Spain
Speakers: Eirik Aasland Salvesen, Wael Att, Andrea Bazzucchi, Andre Chen, Maja Chmielewska, Karim Dada, Mona Eide-Gast, Vincent Fehmer, Roshi Frafjord, Fernando Franch, Ophir Fromovich, Nuno Gil, Oscar Gonzalez-Martin, Sanaa Kader, France Lambert, Adriaens Laurence , Diego Lops, Mark Lowe, James Mah, Patrice Margossian, Alberto Monje, Léon Parienté, Lucrezia Paternò Holtzman, Alessandro Perucchi, Sonia Presencia Pascual, Algirdas Puišys, Cristian Scognamiglio, Prav Solanki, Gabor Tepper, Jasper Thoolen, Jochen Tunkel, Kay Vietor, Eglė Vindašiūtė-Narbutė, Sarah Weston
Straumann GmbH
SEPA 24 Bilbao
Clinical evidence based on scientific evidence29. May 2024 — 1. Jun 2024Bilbao, Spain
Speakers: Eduardo Anitua, Sofia Aroca, Serhat Aslan, Gustavo Avila-Ortiz, Juan Blanco Carrión, Gonzalo Blasi, Nagihan Bostanci, Iain L. C. Chapple, Jan Cosyn, Glécio Vaz de Campos, Luca De Stavola, Jan Derks, Vincent Fehmer, Elena Figuero, Sergio García, Alfonso L. Gil, Oscar Gonzalez-Martin, Adrian Guerrero, Sérgio Kahn, Alejandro Lanis, Antonio Liñares, Ferrán Llansana, Francesco Mangano, Dino Calzavara mantovani, Mauro Merli, Juan Mesquida, Alberto Monje, Eduardo Montero, Stefano Parma-Benfenati, Bjarni E. Pjetursson, Pablo Ramírez, Mariano Sanz, Ignacio Sanz Sànchez, Beatriz Solano Mendoza, Jacobo Somoza, Martina Stefanini, Maurizio S. Tonetti, Leonardo Trombelli, Ion Zabalegui
35th EAED Spring Open Meeting
35 years of Esthetic Dentistry - The masters, the fundamentals, today's trends23. May 2024 — 25. May 2024The Baron's Hall & Gallery, Vila Nova Gaia, Portugal
Speakers: Luís Azevedo, Urs C. Belser, Nitzan Bichacho, Markus Blatz, Jorge Cardoso, Nuno Sousa Dias, Petra Gierthmühlen, Aiste Gintaute, Oscar Gonzalez-Martin, Stefano Gracis, Ueli Grunder, Arndt Happe, Marc Hürzeler, France Lambert, Amélie Mainjot, Alexandros Manolakis, Konrad H. Meyenberg, Nazariy Mykhaylyuk, José M. Navarro, Gaetano Paolone, Stavros Pelekanos, Roberto Perasso, João Pitta, Pablo Ramírez, Andrea Ricci, Giano Ricci, Giuseppe Romeo, Irena Sailer, David Winkler, Yu Zhang, Giovanni Zucchelli
European Academy of Esthetic Dentistry
30th EAO Annual Scientific Meeting / 37th DGI Annual Congress
Speakers: Samir Abou-Ayash, Bilal Al-Nawas, Thomas Bernhart, Florian Beuer, Stefan Bienz, Elena Calciolari, Najla Chebib, Andreas Dengel, Vincent Donker, Joke Duyck, Roberto Farina, Gary Finelle, Alberto Fonzar, Tobias Fretwurst, Rudolf Fürhauser, Oscar Gonzalez-Martin, Stefano Gracis, Knut A. Grötz, Christian Hammächer, Lisa J. A. Heitz-Mayfield, Detlef Hildebrand, Norbert Jakse, Jim Janakievski, Tim Joda, Daniel Jönsson, Gregg Kinzer, Vincent G. Kokich, Michael Krimmel, Cecilia Larsson Wexell, Martin Lorenzoni, Georg Mailath-Pokorny, Julia Mailath-Pokorny, Frank Georg Mathers, Gerry McKenna, Henny Meijer, Alberto Monje, Torsten Mundt, Nadja Nänni, David Nisand, Robert Nölken, Nicole Passia, Michael Payer, Christof Pertl, Aušra Ramanauskaitė, Eik Schiegnitz, Martin Schimmel, Ulrike Schulze-Späte, Frank Schwarz, Falk Schwendicke, Robert Stigler, Michael Stimmelmayr, Anette Strunz, Christian Ulm, Stefan Vandeweghe, Kay Vietor, Arjan Vissink, Asaf Wilensky, Stefan Wolfart, Werner Zechner, Anja Zembic, Nicola Zitzmann
European Association for Osseintegration (EAO)
Management of Implant-Related Complications in the Aesthetic Zone: From Theory to Practice
24. Aug 2023 — 25. Aug 2023Boston, United States of America
Speakers: Oscar Gonzalez-Martin
Harvard School of Dental Medicine
EAO Digital Days
Implantology: Beyond your expectations12. Oct 2021 — 14. Oct 2021online
Speakers: Enrico Agliardi, Alessandro Agnini, Andrea Mastrorosa Agnini, Mauricio Araujo, Goran Benic, Juan Blanco Carrión, Daniel Buser, Raffaele Cavalcanti, Tali Chackartchi, Luca Cordaro, Jan Cosyn, Holger Essig, Vincent Fehmer, Stefan Fickl, Alberto Fonzar, Helena Francisco, German O. Gallucci, Ramin Gomez-Meda, Oscar Gonzalez-Martin, Robert Haas, Arndt Happe, Alexis Ioannidis, Ronald Jung, Niklaus P. Lang, Tomas Linkevičius, Iva Milinkovic, Sven Mühlemann, Katja Nelson, Sergio Piano, Michael A. Pikos, Bjarni E. Pjetursson, Marc Quirynen, Franck Renouard, Isabella Rocchietta, Dennis Rohner, Irena Sailer, Henning Schliephake, Shakeel Shahdad, Massimo Simion, Ali Tahmaseb, Hendrik Terheyden, Jochen Tunkel, Stefan Vandeweghe, Piero Venezia, Stijn Vervaeke, Martin Wanendeya, Georg Watzek, Giovanni Zucchelli
European Association for Osseintegration (EAO)
This author's journal articles
International Journal of Periodontics & Restorative Dentistry, Pre-Print
DOI: 10.11607/prd.7257, PubMed ID (PMID): 391206339. Aug 2024,Pages 1-28, Language: EnglishJorba-Garcia, Adria / Gonzalez-Martin, Oscar / Chambrone, Leandro / Fonseca, Manrique / Couso-Queiruga, Emilio
Several treatment-oriented classifications for the management of peri-implant marginal mucosal defects (PMMDs) have been published to date. While each classification provides valuable insights into key diagnostic and therapeutic aspects, there is a marked heterogeneity regarding the recommended clinical guidelines to achieve success in specific scenarios. The purpose of this review was to critically analyze and organize the similarities and differences enclosed in the available classifications linked with treatment recommendations on the management of PMMDs at single implant non-molar sites with the purpose of providing an overview of recommended interdisciplinary treatment options to facilitate clinical decision-making processes.
The primary aim of this study was to evaluate the efficacy of alveolar ridge preservation (ARP) ther- apy compared with unassisted socket healing (USH) in attenuating interproximal soft tissue atrophy. Adult patients who underwent maxillary single-tooth extraction with or without ARP therapy were included. Surface scans were obtained and CBCT was performed to digitally assess interproximal soft tissue height changes and measure facial bone thickness (FBT), respectively. Logistic regres- sion models were conducted to investigate the individual effect of demographic and clinical vari- ables. Ninety-six subjects (USH = 49; ARP = 47) constituted the study population. Linear soft tissue assessments revealed a significant reduction of the interproximal soft tissue over time within and between groups (P < .0001). ARP therapy significantly attenuated interproximal soft tissue height re- duction compared to USH: –2.0 ± 0.9 mm mesially for USH vs –1.0 ± 0.5 mm mesially for ARP; –1.9 ± 0.7 mm distally for USH vs –1.1 ± 0.5 mm distally for ARP (P < .0001). Thin (≤ 1 mm) facial bone thick- ness (FBT) upon extraction was associated with greater interproximal soft tissue atrophy compared to thick FBT (> 1 mm), independent of the treatment received (P < .0001). Nevertheless, ARP therapy resulted in better preservation of interproximal soft tissue height, especially in thin bone phenotype, by a factor of 2 for the mesial site (+1.3 mm) and by a factor of 1.6 for the distal site (+0.9 mm). This study demonstrated that ARP therapy largely attenuates interproximal soft tissue dimensional re- duction after maxillary single-tooth extraction compared to USH.
Keywords: alveolar ridge preservation, bone resorption, dental implants, digital image processing, tooth extraction
International Journal of Periodontics & Restorative Dentistry, 1/2024
DOI: 10.11607/prd.6574, PubMed ID (PMID): 37819852Pages 59-69, Language: EnglishGonzalez-Martin, Oscar / Solar, Daniel del / Perez, Javier / Vargas, Marcos / Avila-Ortiz, Gustavo
Ultrathin ceramic veneers are a viable therapeutic option to manage esthetic challenges in the anterior zone. Proper conditioning of the intaglio surface of porcelain veneers is essential to achieve an adequate bonding. In clinical practice, this is typically done with chemical etching using an acid-containing agent, such as hydrofluoric acid. While it is well established that the etching effect is dependent on etching time and the acid concentration, little is known about the impact of etching time and the veneer fabrication method. The purpose of this pilot study was to evaluate, using scanning electron microscopy (SEM), the effect that different etching-time protocols have on the intaglio surface characteristics of ultrathin ceramic veneers fabricated with either the platinum foil technique or the refractory die technique. Several replicas of an ultrathin feldspathic ceramic veneer for a maxillary central incisor were fabricated. Individual specimens were processed according to different intaglio surface-etching protocols: no etching, etching for 90 seconds, etching for 120 seconds, and etching for 150 seconds (9.6% hydrofluoric acid used for all etching groups). It was observed that the 120-second etching protocol resulted in a favorable microroughness surface pattern in the platinum foil group. This pattern was comparable to that obtained by etching for 90 seconds with hydrofluoric acid the intaglio surface of veneers fabricated with the refractory die technique. Increasing the etching time to 150 seconds did not result in a more favorable roughness pattern.
The International Journal of Prosthodontics, 5/2021
DOI: 10.11607/ijp.7170Pages 567-577, Language: EnglishGonzalez-Martin, Oscar / Avila-Ortiz, Gustavo / Torres-Muñoz, Ana / Del Solar, Daniel / Veltri, Mario
Purpose: To evaluate the incidence of ultrathin ceramic veneer fractures with different preparation protocols over a period of 36 months and the possible relationship with local- and patient-related factors.
Materials and Methods: Adult patients who received ceramic veneers for improvement in smile esthetics were selected from a private practice pool. Restorations were grouped as conventional (prep) or ultrathin ceramic veneers following either a minimal preparation (min-prep) or no tooth preparation (no-prep) protocol. After veneer bonding, all patients were followed up at intervals of 6 months up to 36 months. A panel of clinical outcomes was recorded, and patient satisfaction was assessed at 36 months.
Results: The study sample was formed by 49 patients who received a total of 194 veneers. Twelve veneers were prep, 125 were min-prep, and 57 were no-prep. Total fracture occurrence was 9.8% in 13 participants. No fractures were observed in prep veneers, while 16 out of 125 min-prep and 3 out of 57 no-prep veneers had fractures. Most fractures (13 out of 19) occurred early, within the first 12 months after bonding. Out of 194 veneers, only 1 had a catastrophic failure (0.5%), 3 had large (≥ 1 mm) chippings (1.5%), and 15 had minor (< 1 mm) chippings (7.7%). A generalized estimating equation model revealed that the odds of veneer fracture were significantly higher in men (odds ratio [OR] = 11.29), in patients who exhibited tooth wear at baseline (OR = 5.54), and in central (OR = 13.56) and lateral (OR = 10.43) incisors compared to canines and premolars. All participants indicated that they would not change to a different restorative protocol in order to have a thicker restoration and possibly less risk of fracture.
Conclusion: Ultrathin ceramic veneers are a viable cosmetic dentistry treatment option that involve minimal or no tooth preparation. However, a tendency for increased early fractures was observed in the min-prep group.
This study evaluated a panel of clinical, dimensional, volumetric, implant-related, histomorphometric, and patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) following reconstruction of dehiscence defects in extraction sockets with a minimally invasive technique using particulate bone allograft and a nonresorbable dense polytetrafluoroethylene (dPTFE) membrane. Subjects (n = 17) presenting severe buccal dehiscence defects at the time of single-rooted tooth extraction participated in the study. The mean vertical dimension of the dehiscence defects at baseline was 5.76 ± 4.23 mm. Subjects were followed up at 1, 2, 5, and 20 weeks postoperatively. The dPTFE barrier was gently removed at 5 weeks. CBCT and intraoral scans were obtained at baseline and at 20 weeks. A bone core biopsy sample was harvested at 24 weeks (before implant placement). Linear radiographic measurements revealed a mean increase in buccal bone height from baseline to 20 weeks (5.66 ± 5.1 mm; P < .0001). A total alveolar bone volume gain of 9.12% was observed. Although approximately half of the sites required some degree of additional bone augmentation at the time of implant placement, all implants were placed in a favorable restorative position with adequate primary stability. Histomorphometric analyses revealed a mean mineralized tissue area of 31.04% ± 15.22%, and the proportions of remaining allograft material and nonmineralized tissue were 16.23% ± 10.63% and 52.71% ± 9.53%, respectively. All implants survived up to 12 months after placement. PROMs were compatible with minimal discomfort at different postoperative stages and a high level of overall satisfaction upon study completion. This study demonstrated that the reconstructive procedure employed was successful and predictable in treating large, postextraction alveolar ridge deformities to optimize tooth replacement therapy with implant-supported prostheses.
This study aimed to assess how frequently the maxilla anatomy allows for lingualized immediate implants in the central incisor region with a screw channel that has an ideal distance of 1.5 mm from the incisal margin. The effect of abutments with angle correction on case selection will also be verified. A retrospective cross-sectional study of 181 CBCT scans was carried out. Using an implant-planning software, implant placement was simulated in the lingual aspect of the socket. The location of the prospective screw channel was registered as incisal, lingual, or facial. The angle between the actual screw channel and the position of the ideal one was calculated. The effect of angle correction on allowing an ideal screw channel configuration was computed. Out of 161 eligible cases, 144 presented favorable anatomy for an immediate implant. The screw channel had an incisal position in 40 cases (28%), a lingual position in 60 cases (42%), and a facial position in 44 cases (30%). The screw channel could be placed at the planned distance from the incisal edge in 35 cases (24%). The position was unfavorable in the remaining 109 cases. In 103 of these cases, an abutment with an angled screw channel could make the conditions feasible. Within the simulated conditions, a majority of maxillary central incisors present favorable ridge anatomy for lingualized immediate implant placement. Achieving a proper location of the screw channel requires abutments with angle correction in a majority of cases.
This study aimed to characterize extraction sockets based on indirect digital root analysis. The outcomes of interest were estimated socket volume and dimensions of the socket orifice. A total of 420 extracted teeth, constituting 15 complete sets of permanent teeth (except third molars), were selected. Teeth were scanned to obtain STL files of the root complex for digital analysis. After digitally sectioning each root 2.0 mm apical to the cementoenamel junction (CEJ), root volume was measured in mm3 and converted to cc. Subsequently, a horizontal section plane was drawn at the most zenithal level of the buccal CEJ, and the surface area (in mm2) and buccolingual and mesiodistal linear measurements of the socket orifice (in mm) were computed. Maxillary first molars exhibited the largest mean root volume (0.451 ± 0.096 cc) and mandibular central incisors the smallest (0.106 ± 0.02 cc). Surface area analysis demonstrated that mandibular first molars presented the largest socket orifice area (78.56 ± 10.44 mm2), with mandibular central incisors presenting the smallest area (17.45 ± 1.82 mm2). Maxillary first molars showed the largest mean socket orifice buccolingual dimension (11.08 ± 0.60 mm), and mandibular first molars showed the largest mean mesiodistal dimension (9.73 ± 0.84 mm). Mandibular central incisors exhibited the smallest mean buccolingual (5.87 ± 0.26 mm) and mesiodistal (3.52 ± 0.24 mm) linear dimensions. Findings from this study can be used by clinicians to efficiently plan extraction-site management procedures (such as alveolar ridge preservation via socket grafting and sealing) and implant provisionalization therapy, and by the industry to design products that facilitate site-specific execution of these interventions.