Objectives: In the field of oral soft and hard tissue reconstruction, there are many data on the use and success of foreign materials of animal, mineral and synthetic origin. Religious and ethical acceptability of these materials is important in our globalised, multicultural world. The aim of our study was to determine the acceptance of allogenic or xenogenic materials among different religious groups and different polytheistics. Methods: Detailed questionnaires were handed out to twelve national leaders of various religious groups: Roman Catholic, Protestant Christian, Muslim, Greek Orthodox, New Apostolic, Romanian Orthodox, Buddhist, Serbian Orthodox, Jewish, Jehova’s Witness and Hindu. The task was to distinguish three groups according[?] to acceptance of different materials by their communities: contraindicated for ethical/religious reasons (group V); informed consent required (group C); and acceptance (group A). At the same time, 120 dentists working in oral surgeries were asked about their awareness of and publicity of ten common materials and their origins, as well as patient-information practices, and patient reactions. Results: All twelve religious groups responded to the questionnaire, mostly after seeking a qualified opinion from an international religious centre. The majority (n = 9) claimed to provide basic information for patients before undergoing any intervention. Some (n = 5) prohibited the use of animal or human tissues for religious or ethical reasons. Others (n = 2) excluded them because of the risk of disease transmission or cruelty to animals. Of the 120 polled dentists or surgeons, the minority (n = 12) were unaware of the origins of the ten described products. For a very small number of patients, the use of tissue replacement materials and the nature of the donor or origin have been important issues, but most did not approve of the use of allogeneic or xenogeneic tissue substitutes in their interventions. Conclusion:Religious attitudes to the preparation and performance of routine dental surgeries showed significant differences. From the findings, it is obvious that patients’ ethical and religious acceptance of biomaterials in this field cannot be assumed. The origin of materials should be clarified and reasonable alternatives pointed out before any intervention to prevent intercultural misunderstanding and judicial consequences.

Gliederung: 1. Einleitendes Statement des Autors mit Demonstrationen des chirurgischen Vorgehens anhand von Zeichnungen und Modellen 2. Instrumente und Materialien 3. Klinischer und röntgenologischer Befund des demonstrierten Falls 4. Die chirurgischen Eingriffe am Patienten 4.1 Subgingivale Curettage 4.2 Gingivoplastik mit dem Elektrotom 4.3 Frenektomie 5. Demonstration der Ergebnisse an zwei Fällen 6. Abschließendes Statement des Autors über Modifikationen. ln diesem ersten Teil des insgesamt vierteiligen Fortbildungsprogramms zur Parodontalchirurgie demonstriert Professor Mutschelknauß die drei am häufigsten indizierten Eingriffe; Die subgingivale Curettage, die Gingivoplastik und die Frenektomie, die Exzision des Lippen-bändchens. Anhand der röntgenologischen und klinischen Befunde und mit informativen schematischen Darstellungen der geplanten Operationen begründet und beschreibt der Autor sein chirurgisches Vorgehen. Die Eingriffe selbst werden in allen Phasen umfassend - das heißt; direkt nachvollziehbar - vorgeführt. Seine begleitenden Erläuterungen zu jedem Detailschritt des Vorgehens ergänzt der Autor mit persönlichen Erfahrungen, kritischen Interpretationen und möglichen Modifikationen - eine praxisnahe Demonstration von hohem Fortbildungswert.