Evaluation of the Effect of Implants Placed in Preserved Sockets Versus Fresh Sockets on Tissue Preservation and Esthetics: A Meta-analysis and Systematic Review

Alveolar ridge preservation versus early implant placement in single non-molar sites: A systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this systematic review and meta-analyses was to evaluate the outcomes of alveolar ridge preservation (ARP) following extraction of non-molar teeth in comparison to early implant placement (EIP) in terms of clinical and radiographic changes, need for additional augmentation at the time of implant placement, patient-reported outcomes, and implant failure rate.

METHODS

Electronic databases were searched to identify randomized and non-randomized studies that compared ARP to EIP. The risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane Collaboration's Risk of Bias tool. Data were analyzed using a statistical software program.

RESULTS

A total of 106 studies were identified, of which five studies with 198 non-molar extraction sockets in 198 participants were included. Overall meta-analysis showed significant differences in changes in midfacial mucosal margin (mean difference (MD) -0.09; 95% confidence interval (CI) -0.17 to -0.01; p = .03) and ridge width (MD -1.70; 95% CI -3.19 to -0.20; p = .03) in favor of ARP. The use of ARP was also associated with less need for additional augmentation at implant placement, but the difference was not statistically significant.

CONCLUSIONS

Within the limitation of this review, ARP following extraction of non-molar teeth has short-term positive effects on soft tissue contour, mucosal margin and thickness, and alveolar ridge width and height. It can also simplify future implant treatment by minimizing the need for additional augmentation.

Immediately placed implants using simvastatin and autogenous tooth graft combination in periodontally compromised sites: a randomized controlled clinical trial

OBJECTIVES

The present study aimed to assess clinically and radiographically the usage of autogenous tooth bone graft (ATBG) combined with and without Simvastatin (SMV) around immediately placed dental implants in periodontally compromised sites.

METHODS

Thirty-nine patients required a single extraction of periodontally compromised tooth were divided into three groups (13 patients each). Group I received immediate implant placement (IIP) without grafting. Group II received IIP with ATBG filling the gap around IIP. Group III received SMV gel mixed with ATBG around IIP. Radiographic changes were reported at the baseline, 6-, and 12-months post-surgery.

RESULTS

All implants achieved the success criteria with no complications. At 6- and 12-months post-surgery, group III showed a statistically lower mean ridge width loss compared to Group I and Group II (P < .001). Group II revealed less reduction in the mean alveolar ridge width compared to group I (P < .001). Group III showed a statistically significantly less MBL loss than group I and group II (P < .001). All groups showed a statistically significant increase in BD gain compared to baseline (P < .001). Group III showed statistically significant high BD compared to group II (P < .001). Group II showed statistically significantly higher mean BD gain than that of group I (P < .001).

CONCLUSION

SMV combined with ATBG boosts the hard tissue parameters around dental implants over ATBG alone. Clinical trial registration was on August 1, 2021 (NCT04992416).

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

ATBG with SMV in periodontally compromised sites could improve implant osseointegration and promote favorable changes in peri-implant tissues.

Comparison of the Photofunctionalization and Platelet-Rich Plasma in the Immediate Implants

Introduction

Many adjuvant methods have been researched to enhance the immediate implant success in the recent times. The study's goal was to compare the aesthetic and biological results of immediate dental implants in the aesthetic zone to standard tapered root form implants that had not undergone pre-treatment with platelet-rich plasma or photofunctionalization.

Materials and Methods

The study used a randomized controlled trial as its design. Ninety subjects were chosen at random and placed into three groups: a control group, a case group, and a group that needed replacement of their maxillary anterior teeth right away following extraction. The interventional groups received the "Platelet-Rich Plasma (PRP)" or "Photofunctionalization (PF)" group before the implant placement. After the delayed loading approach, the prosthesis was given after 6 months. At the second and fourth weeks, as well as 2, 4, 6, and 12 months (P 0.05), follow-up was conducted. The success and survival rate, aesthetic, and biological outcomes were assessed. One-way ANOVA was used to compare outcomes, and repeated-measures ANOVA was used to assess intragroup variations over baseline and follow-up.

Results

The distal, mesial, and mean marginal bone loss as well as the aesthetic scores for pink and white did not differ significantly between groups. The implant stability however was significantly higher in the PF and PRP groups as compared to the controls. A single implant failed in all the three groups. The success percentage was similar for all the groups.

Conclusion

The stability of immediate dental implants pre-treated with PRP or PF differed statistically significantly than the subjects in the control group, while other parameters remained the similar between the groups.

Immediate implant placement in compromised sockets: A systematic review and meta-analysis

STATEMENT OF PROBLEM

Immediate implant placement provides a popular therapeutic option. However, compromised sockets may jeopardize the treatment outcome.

PURPOSE

The purpose of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to investigate the treatment outcome in terms of the implant survival rate and success parameters of immediate implant placement in compromised extraction sockets.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

An electronic search was conducted in PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, and ISI Web of Science up to January 2021. Studies evaluating implant survival rate and main success parameters were included for a qualitative and quantitative analysis (risk ratio and mean difference).

RESULTS

In total, 43 studies with analysis of 4825 sockets were included. Compared with the noncompromised sockets, the compromised group showed no significant differences in implant survival rates (risk ratio=0.992; 95% confidence interval (CI)=0.979 to 1.005; P=.246). No significant statistical differences were found in marginal bone level at ≤12 months (mean difference [MD]=0.033; 95% CI=-0.012 to 0.078; P=.154) or esthetic parameters.

CONCLUSIONS

Immediate implant placement in compromised sites does not appear to decrease the survival and success rates. However, randomized clinical trials with large sample sizes should be conducted to draw a definite conclusion about the efficacy and safety of this treatment protocol in compromised sockets.

Resorbable Membrane Pouch Technique for Single-Implant Placement in the Esthetic Zone: A Preliminary Technical Case Report

The conventional protocol for lateral guided bone regeneration (GBR) in esthetic areas requires the securing of resorbable collagen membranes using titanium cortical bone pins to immobilize bone grafts. These procedures are highly invasive and can increase patient morbidity and discomfort. Herein, we introduce a minimally invasive novel resorbable membrane pouch technique, wherein collagen membranes can be immobilized by securing them to the periosteum without the need of titanium pins. We describe 11 cases of single-immediate- or delayed-implant placement in the atrophic maxilla esthetic zone. All implants were successful and functional without pain or inflammation and with optimal soft-tissue health and esthetics. Radiographic evaluation with cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) and esthetic assessment using the pink esthetic score (PES) were performed. At the time of implant placement, the average augmented bone width was 2.8 ± 0.6 mm on CBCT analysis. In all cases, resorption of the augmented bone was confirmed with an average of −1.3 ± 0.8 mm. Soft-tissue outcomes were scored 1 year after permanent restoration. The PES score 1 year after treatment was 11.9 ± 1.4. The resorbable membrane pouch technique with immediate or delayed implant placement for buccal dehiscence in the esthetic area can be predictable and is minimally invasive.

Biological and esthetic outcome of immediate dental implant with the adjunct pretreatment of immediate implants with platelet-rich plasma or photofunctionalization: A randomized controlled trial

Aim

The purpose of the study was to assess biological and esthetic outcomes of immediate dental implant in esthetic zone with the adjunct pretreatment of immediate implants with photofunctionalization or platelet-rich plasma in comparison to standard tapered root form implant without pretreatment.

Settings and Design

Patients visiting department of Prosthodontics of a tertiary care health Institution. Design of the study was randomized controlled trial.

Materials and Methods

Ninety subjects who required replacement of maxillary anterior teeth immediately after extraction were selected and randomly divided into three groups: control group and two case groups. Two case groups were treated with immediate implants with pretreatment with Photofunctionalization (PF group) or platelet-rich plasma (PRP group). Delayed loading protocol was followed with prosthesis given after 6 months. Follow-up was performed at 2nd and 4th weeks and 2, 4, 6, and 12 months (P < 0.05). Biological outcomes (mean marginal bone loss, implant stability), esthetic outcome (pink esthetic score and white esthetic score), and success and survival rate were evaluated.

Statistical Analysis Used

Outcomes were compared using one-way ANOVA, while intragroup changes with baseline and follow up were assesed using repeated-measures ANOVA. Statistical analyses were performed using Statistical Package for Social Sciences version 25.0 (SPSS Inc., Chicago, IL, USA). The level of significance was set at <.05.

Results

Mean marginal bone loss was not significantly different in PF group and PRP group than the control group. PF group and PRP group showed significantly greater implant stability as compared to the control group. Pink and white esthetic scores were not significantly different among groups.

Conclusion

Pretreatment of commercial dental implants with PF or PRP exhibited a statistically significant difference in implant stability but not with other outcomes.

Immediate single-tooth implant placement with simultaneous bone augmentation versus delayed implant placement after alveolar ridge preservation in bony defect sites in the esthetic region: A 5-year randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

It is unclear if an intact buccal bony plate is a prerequisite for immediate implant placement in post-extraction sockets. The aim of this 5-year randomized controlled trial was therefore comparison of peri-implant soft and hard tissue parameters, esthetic ratings, and patient-reported satisfaction of immediate implant placement in post-extraction sockets with buccal bony defects of ≥ 5 mm in the esthetic zone, with delayed implant placement after ridge preservation.

METHODS

Patients presenting a failing tooth in the esthetic region and a buccal bony defect of ≥ 5 mm after extraction were randomly assigned to immediate (Immediate group, n = 20) or delayed (Delayed group, n = 20) implant placement. Second-stage surgery and placement of a provisional restoration occurred 3 months after implant placement in both groups, followed by definitive restorations 3 months thereafter. The follow-up was 5 years. Marginal bone level (primary outcome), buccal bone thickness, soft tissue parameters, esthetics, and patient-reported satisfaction were recorded.

RESULTS

Mean marginal bone level change was -0.71 ± 0.35 mm and -0.54 ± 0.41 mm in respectively the Immediate group and the Delayed group after 5 years (P = 0.202). This difference, and in other variables, was not significant.

CONCLUSIONS

Marginal bone level changes, buccal bone thickness, clinical outcomes, esthetics, and patients' satisfaction following immediate implant placement, in combination with bone augmentation in post-extraction sockets with buccal bony defects of ≥ 5 mm, were comparable to those following delayed implant placement after ridge preservation in the esthetic zone.