The 6^th Consensus Conference of the European Association for Osseointegration (EAO) will remain in our memories, as it took place in midst of the still ongoing COVID-19 pandemic. During the initial stages of the planning and preparation of this Consensus Conference, no one was able to imagine how fast and how significant the outbreak of COVID-19 would change the World. The resulting major challenge for the EAO and the organization of its Consensus Conference was that the entire scientific meeting had to be performed fully virtually via a specifically developed telecommunication platform (Figure 1). This platform and the associated organization of the groups and their work had to be established in a very short time, as the pandemic situation and the associated travel restrictions were constantly changing. Nevertheless, and although the experts could not physically meet to discuss and debate as usual, the first ever virtual Consensus Conference by the EAO can be considered as a true success!

The initial plan was, similar to previous Consensus Conferences by the EAO, to unify the 69 invited experts during four days in a convenient retreat location, allowing for conventional group work during the days to elaborate the consensus statements based on the evidence in the systematic reviews, and plenary sessions in the evenings to discuss and approve the consensus statements by all participants of the consensus meeting.

The preparations of the Consensus Conference had begun as usual. According to the well-established protocol for the organization and execution of EAO Consensus Conferences (Hämmerle, 2018; Hämmerle & Quirynen, 2009; Hämmerle et al., 2012, 2015; Hämmerle & van Steenberghe, 2006), in 2019 the EAO board assigned three responsible board members to define the topics and rapporteurs, and the invited guests per topic for this Consensus Conference. One of the initiators and long-term coordinators of the EAO Consensus Conferences, Prof. Christoph Hämmerle, had decided to step down from this leading position after having chaired 5 EAO Consensus Conferences, and Prof. Irena Sailer (Geneva, Switzerland) was nominated as his successor and co-chair. In addition, professors Henning Schliephake (Germany) and Björn Klinge (Sweden) were assigned by the board as co-chairs. In line with the change in leadership, the EAO Consensus Conference was foreseen to dislocate from Pfäffikon, Schwyz, to a new retreat location in Evian, France, close to Geneva. Furthermore, a new logo for the EAO Consensus Conference was created (Figure 2).

An international scientific committee was formed consisting of Luca Cordaro (Italy), Helena Francisco (Portugal), Petra Gierthmühlen (Germany), Klaus Gotfredsen (Denmark), Lisa Heitz-Mayfield (Australia), David Nisand (France), Bjarni Pjetursson (Iceland), Isabelle Rocchietta (UK/Italy), Mario Roccuzzo (Italy), Mariano Sanz (Spain), Frank Schwarz (Germany), Andreas Stavropoulos (Switzerland/Sweden), Daniel Thoma (Switzerland), Stefan Wolfart (Germany), Ann Wennerberg (Sweden), and the three chairpersons of the Consensus Conference. This scientific committee selected the main topics for the planned four groups of the 2021 Consensus Conference and developed the respective review topics within the groups. Three to four topics, the responsible experts for these reviews, the rapporteurs, were nominated. Furthermore, the scientific committee selected additional experts per group to be assigned as group secretaries and chairpersons to guide the groups, and compile the groups’ consensus reports, and invited the group participants. New this time was to invite a team of Swedish experts on Health Technology Assessment (HTA) starting the workshop with online short lectures on methodology and quality assessment of published literature. The experts were subsequently available for the protocol development in the respective groups and offering final support during the CC.

The perception of patients of the different treatment modalities was considered specifically important, as the current developments and technologies in implant dentistry allow for a myriad of different treatment strategies involving different cost–benefit ratios, and the decision-making process becomes increasingly complex as evidence is not the only influencing parameter.

Patient perception of treatment quality/PROMs.

Due to the increasingly worrying situation caused by the COVID-19 pandemic, and the associated confusion about the measures for protective adaptation within the dental profession, early in 2020 the EAO board decided to assign a fifth group to the Consensus Conference to review the current state of knowledge on a topic of highest relevance—the COVID-19 review of European recommendations and experts’ opinion on dental care. This group was presided by Prof. Björn Klinge and included three experts for the survey and reviewing of the literature, Dr. Kathrin Becker, Dr. Katarzyna Gurzawska-Comis, and Dr. Giulia Brunello. Two new studies implemented by the group constituted the base for the EAO consensus statement on COVID-19 in dentistry. The first survey gave an update of European experts’ opinion on infection control and prevention in dentistry during second wave of the pandemic. It also included an analysis how experts’ opinion changed in light of the new scientific evidence since the first wave. In the second paper, guidelines from all European Union countries, Scotland, Switzerland, and United Kingdom were retrieved. Information on triage, mouth rinse, personal protective equipment (PPE) for aerosol free/generating procedures (nonAGP/AGP) and treatment of potentially infectious patients were summarized and compared with recommendations from international organizations (World Health Organization, European Center for Disease Control and US Center for Disease Control).

All 17 reviews were submitted to Clinical Oral Implants Research before the Consensus Conference, for a pre-review and pre-revision of the manuscripts prior to the discussions at the consensus meeting. This allowed for efficient online group work for the approval of the review manuscripts, and the subsequent formulation of the groups’ consensus reports. These reports summarize the major findings from the reviews, and the present consensus statements related to the above-mentioned topics discussed within each group, in order to make recommendations for clinical practice, and suggest implications for research. All this is now available in this supplement to Clinical Oral Implants Research.

But, back to the preparations of the Consensus Conference:

After all planning was accomplished, and the rapporteurs, chairs, secretaries, and experts were invited the logistic preparations of the (still conventional) consensus meeting began in collaboration of the EAO office and the Consensus Conference chairs. Unfortunately, the pandemic situation had worsened, and it became more and more obvious that a conventional in-presence Consensus Conference would not be possible for the planned number of participants. As a consequence, in Fall 2020 the organizers started changing the meeting to a hybrid Consensus Conference format with partly in-presence and partly remote contributions. Finally, in January 2021, the entire Consensus Conference had to be switched to an online-only format (Figure 1). The meeting was shortened from four to three days, and the program adapted to the online format.

To keep the known productive, yet, also entertaining and collegial spirit of this meeting, the EAO office colleagues had an excellent idea to send out EAO CC Socializer Packages (Figure 3) for the three days and evenings to all the participants to surprise the hard workers. With aid of the solid and liquid treats in these boxes, the original spirit and the unique atmosphere of the EAO Consensus Conferences were kept alive during the long hours of debates, despite the physical distance.

The EAO as an independent professional organization active in implant dentistry was the only body covering the costs of this Consensus Conference. No outside funding was used neither for the conference nor for publishing this supplement. All the conference participants were asked to declare dual commitments and possible conflicts of interest verbally and in writing. The written forms are kept on file at the EAO secretariat. Thanks to the continuous efforts of the EAO board to maintain its independence, the EAO is able to provide this valuable information to the field of implant dentistry based on the state of the science.

The organizers express their special thanks to all the participants of the conference for dedicating their time, for providing valuable input, to the rapporteurs for their important efforts to prepare the reviews, the chairpersons and secretaries for guiding the group discussions during the conference and for writing the consensus reports of their groups, and to the board of directors of the EAO for the mandate to organize the 6^th EAO Consensus Conference. Special thanks also to the Swedish experts on Health Technology Assessment (HTA) (Swedish Agency on Health Technology Assessment and Assessment of Social Services) for their assistance during the preparations of the reviews, and during the Consensus Conference debates, and the all involved collaborators of the EAO office who helped maintain the Consensus Conference in steadily changing conditions. Furthermore, the expertise and dedication of Prof. Lisa Heitz-Mayfield, the Editor-in-Chief of Clinical Oral Implant Research, is highly appreciated. Finally, the continuous support of Wiley Blackwell is acknowledged allowing the results of this conference to be published in this highly ranked and respected scientific journal.

On behalf of the EAO and its board

Irena Sailer, Henning Schliephake and Björn Klinge

第^六届欧洲骨整合协会 (EAO) 的共识会议将留在我们的记忆中，因为它发生在仍在持续的 COVID-19 大流行中。在本次共识会议的规划和准备的初始阶段，没有人能够想象 COVID-19 的爆发将改变世界的速度和重要性。由此给 EAO 及其共识会议的组织带来的主要挑战是，整个科学会议必须通过专门开发的电信平台完全以虚拟方式进行（图 1）。由于大流行情况和相关的旅行限制在不断变化，因此必须在很短的时间内建立这个平台和相关的团体组织及其工作。尽管如此，

最初的计划与之前 EAO 的共识会议类似，将 69 位受邀专家在 4 天时间集中在一个方便的撤退地点，允许在这几天进行常规的小组工作，根据系统评价中的证据制定共识声明，晚上举行全体会议，讨论和批准共识会议所有参与者的共识声明。

共识会议的筹备工作照常开始。根据组织和执行 EAO 共识会议的既定协议（Hämmerle, 2018 ; Hämmerle & Quirynen, 2009 ; Hämmerle et al., 2012 , 2015 ; Hämmerle & van Steenberghe, 2006)，2019 年 EAO 董事会指派了三名负责董事会成员来定义本次共识会议的主题和报告员，以及每个主题的受邀嘉宾。EAO 共识会议的发起人和长期协调人之一 Christoph Hämmerle 教授在主持了 5 次 EAO 共识会议后决定辞去这一领导职务，而 Irena Sailer 教授（瑞士日内瓦）被提名为他的继任者和联合主席。此外，董事会指定 Henning Schliephake（德国）和 Björn Klinge（瑞典）教授为联合主席。根据领导层的变化，预计 EAO 共识会议将从施维茨州的普费菲孔转移到法国埃维昂靠近日内瓦的一个新的撤退地点。此外，还创建了 EAO 共识会议的新徽标（图 2）。

由 Luca Cordaro（意大利）、Helena Francisco（葡萄牙）、Petra Gierthmühlen（德国）、Klaus Gotfredsen（丹麦）、Lisa Heitz-Mayfield（澳大利亚）、David Nisand（法国）、Bjarni Pjetursson（冰岛）组成的国际科学委员会成立), Isabelle Rocchietta (英国/意大利), Mario Roccuzzo (意大利), Mariano Sanz (西班牙), Frank Schwarz (德国), Andreas Stavropoulos (瑞士/瑞典), Daniel Thoma (瑞士), Stefan Wolfart (德国), Ann Wennerberg (瑞典)，以及共识会议的三位主席。该科学委员会为2021年共识会议计划的四个小组选择了主要议题，并在小组内制定了各自的审查议题。三到四个主题，这些审查的负责专家，报告员，被提名。此外，科学委员会每组选派额外的专家担任组秘书和组长，指导各组，编写组的共识报告，并邀请组参与者。这一次的新活动是邀请瑞典卫生技术评估 (HTA) 专家团队开始研讨会，其中包括关于已发表文献的方法论和质量评估的在线简短讲座。专家随后可用于各个小组的协议开发，并在 CC 期间提供最终支持。这一次的新活动是邀请瑞典卫生技术评估 (HTA) 专家团队开始研讨会，其中包括关于已发表文献的方法论和质量评估的在线简短讲座。专家随后可用于各个小组的协议开发，并在 CC 期间提供最终支持。这一次的新活动是邀请瑞典卫生技术评估 (HTA) 专家团队开始研讨会，其中包括关于已发表文献的方法论和质量评估的在线简短讲座。专家随后可用于各个小组的协议开发，并在 CC 期间提供最终支持。

患者对不同治疗方式的看法被认为特别重要，因为种植牙的当前发展和技术允许涉及不同成本效益比的无数不同治疗策略，并且随着证据的增多，决策过程变得越来越复杂。不是唯一的影响参数。

患者对治疗质量/PROM 的看法。

由于 COVID-19 大流行造成越来越令人担忧的情况，以及对牙科行业内保护性适应措施的相关混淆，EAO 董事会于 2020 年初决定向共识会议分配第五个小组，以审查当前状态关于最相关主题的知识——COVID - 19 对欧洲牙科护理建议和专家意见的审查. 该小组由Björn Klinge教授主持，包括Kathrin Becker博士、Katarzyna Gurzawska-Comis博士和Giulia Brunello博士三位文献调查和审查专家。该小组实施的两项新研究构成了 EAO 关于牙科 COVID-19 共识声明的基础。第一项调查更新了欧洲专家对第二波大流行期间牙科感染控制和预防的意见。它还包括分析专家的意见如何根据第一波以来的新科学证据发生变化。在第二篇论文中，检索了来自所有欧盟国家、苏格兰、瑞士和英国的指南。有关分类、漱口水、

所有 17 篇评论都在共识会议之前提交给临床口腔种植研究，以便在共识会议讨论之前对手稿进行预审和预修订。这允许高效的在线小组工作以批准审阅手稿，以及随后制定小组的共识报告。这些报告总结了审查的主要发现，以及与各组内讨论的上述主题相关的当前共识声明，以便为临床实践提出建议，并对研究提出建议。所有这些现在都可以在临床口腔种植研究的补充中找到。

但是，回到共识会议的准备工作：

在完成所有计划并邀请报告员、主席、秘书和专家之后，在 EAO 办公室和共识会议主席的合作下，（仍然是传统的）共识会议的后勤准备工作开始了。不幸的是，大流行情况已经恶化，越来越明显的是，对于计划的参与者人数而言，传统的现场共识会议已经不可能了。因此，在 2020 年秋季，组织者开始将会议更改为混合共识会议形式，部分在场，部分为远程贡献。最后，在 2021 年 1 月，整个共识会议不得不切换到仅在线形式（图 1）。会议从四天缩短到三天，节目也适应了在线形式。

为了保持本次会议众所周知的高效、娱乐性和大学精神，EAO办公室的同事们想出了一个绝妙的主意，向所有参与者发送为期三天和晚上的EAO CC社交包（图3），以给所有参与者一个惊喜工人。借助这些盒子中的固体和液体零食，尽管存在物理距离，但在长时间的辩论中，EAO 共识会议的原始精神和独特氛围得以保持。

作为一个活跃于种植牙领域的独立专业组织，EAO 是唯一承担本次共识会议费用的机构。会议和本增刊的出版均未使用外部资金。所有会议参与者都被要求以口头和书面形式声明双重承诺和可能的利益冲突。书面表格保存在 EAO 秘书处存档。由于 EAO 委员会不断努力保持其独立性，EAO 能够根据科学现状向种植牙领域提供这些宝贵的信息。

组织者特别感谢会议的所有参与者付出的时间，提供宝贵的意见，报告员为准备审查所做的重要努力，主席和秘书在会议期间指导小组讨论和写作其小组的共识报告，并提交给 EAO 董事会，以授权组织第 6^次会议EAO 共识会议。还要特别感谢瑞典卫生技术评估专家 (HTA)（瑞典卫生技术评估和社会服务评估机构）在审查准备期间和共识会议辩论期间提供的帮助，以及所有参与的合作者帮助在不断变化的条件下维持共识会议的 EAO 办公室。此外，高度赞赏临床口腔种植研究主编 Lisa Heitz-Mayfield 教授的专业知识和奉献精神。最后，感谢 Wiley Blackwell 的持续支持，使本次会议的结果能够在这本排名靠前和受人尊敬的科学期刊上发表。

代表 EAO 及其董事会

Irena Sailer、Henning Schliephake 和 Björn Klinge