Puisys A, Vindasiute‐Narbute E, Razukevicius D, Akhondi S, Gallucci GO, Pedrinaci I. Clinical efficacy of two vertical soft tissue augmentation techniques for peri-implant crestal bone level stability: A randomized clinical trial.
Clin Implant Dent Relat Res 2024;
26:1086-1100. [PMID:
39128852 PMCID:
PMC11660534 DOI:
10.1111/cid.13365]
[Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/24/2024] [Revised: 07/03/2024] [Accepted: 07/08/2024] [Indexed: 08/13/2024]
Abstract
OBJECTIVES
This study aimed to compare the efficacy of two techniques-acellular dermal matrix (ADM) grafting and tenting technique (TT)-for soft tissue height (STH) augmentation simultaneous to implant placement to minimize peri-implant crestal bone level (CBL) changes.
METHODS
Forty patients with a healed single mandibular posterior edentulous site with a thin soft tissue phenotype were enrolled. Twenty patients received simultaneously to implant placement ADM grafting, while the others received submerged healing abutment (TT). Clinical peri-implant soft tissue height and radiographic CBL changes were measured at restoration delivery and 1-year follow-up.
RESULTS
Both techniques effectively increased soft tissue thickness, resulting in a final average STH of 3.4 ± 0.5 mm after augmentation. On average, soft tissue increased by 1.6 ± 0.5 mm in group ADM and by 1.8 ± 0.4 mm in group TT after augmentation. In Group ADM, mesial CBL decreased from 0.4 ± 0.3 mm to 0.1 ± 0.2 mm, and distal CBL decreased from 0.5 ± 0.3 mm to 0.2 ± 0.3 mm over 1 year. In Group TT, mesial CBL remained stable at 0.3 ± 0.2 mm, while distal CBL reduced slightly from 0.5 ± 0.5 mm to 0.3 ± 0.2 mm. Both groups showed minimal changes in CBL, indicating great stability (pmesial = 0.003, pdistal = 0.004). TT was particularly effective in preventing mesial bone loss (pmesial = 0.019). The mesial CBL changes significantly differed between groups (p = 0.019), and not significantly at distal sites (p = 0.944). Neither treatment exhibited significant bone remodeling below the implant shoulder.
CONCLUSION
This study suggests that both techniques were successful in STH augmentation, and they may effectively reduce peri-implant crestal bone level changes, with TT being slightly superior. TT was more prone to post-surgical complications. This RCT was not registered before participant recruitment and randomization.
Collapse