Buccal bone dimensional changes at immediate implant sites in the maxillary esthetic zone within a 4-12-month follow-up period: A systematic review and meta-analysis

LIMITED DATA SHOWS POTENTIAL OF FLAPLESS SURGERY FOR ENHANCED BUCCAL BONE PRESERVATION IN IMMEDIATE IMPLANT PLACEMENT

ARTICLE TITLE AND BIBLIOGRAPHIC INFORMATION

Pitman J, Christiaens V, Callens J, Glibert M, Seyssens L, Blanco J, Cosyn J. Immediate implant placement with flap or flapless surgery: A systematic review and meta-analysis. J Clin Periodontol. 2023 Jun;50(6):755-764. doi: 10.1111/jcpe.13795. Epub 2023 Mar 5. PMID: 36843361.

SOURCE OF FUNDING

The study was funded by the authors and their affiliated institutions.

TYPE OF STUDY/DESIGN

Systematic review with meta-analysis.

Immediate versus early loading of immediately placed bone-level tapered dental implants with hydrophilic surface in full arch maxillary rehabilitation: A pilot randomized clinical trial with 2-year follow-up

This study aimed to compare implant stabilities between the immediate and early loaded, immediately placed bone-level tapered dental implants in the maxilla and to evaluate marginal bone loss (MBL), oral health-related quality of life (OHRQoL), and patient satisfaction at a 2-year follow-up. A pilot, prospective, randomized, controlled clinical trial was conducted on 24 maxillary failing dentition patients. The bone-level tapered implants of 12 patients were immediately loaded with temporary restorations, while the other 12 patients did not receive any kind of temporization. Implant-supported screw-retained complete porcelain-fused-to-metal prostheses were delivered to all patients in the seventh postoperative week. The insertion torque values of implants assigned to the immediate and early loading groups were 33.0 ± 4.87 and 29.26 ± 8.31 Ncm, respectively. The dynamics of implant stability changes from implant placement up to a 2-year follow-up were similar for both groups (Penguin®, p = 0.268; Ostell®, p = 0.552), while the MBL was at submillimeter level. The cumulative implant survival rate was 91.80% for immediately loaded implants and 97.22% for early loaded implants, without significant difference (p = 0.162). The total score on the Oral Health Impact Profile questionnaire significantly decreased over time in both groups, indicating improvement in OHRQoL (p < 0.001), and the high level of patient satisfaction remained after 2 years of function regardless of a loading protocol. Both loading protocols, immediate and early, of six immediately placed bone-level tapered dental implants are an adequate treatment choice for fixed rehabilitation of the maxillary failing dentition.

Immediate implant placement in extraction sockets with buccal bone dehiscence: A case study

BACKGROUND

Immediate implant placement (IIP) has been associated with a higher risk of esthetic complications and particularly buccal mucosal recession, which can be more pronounced in non-intact sockets or in the presence of thin phenotype in the esthetic zone. Nevertheless, multiple techniques have been published to address IIP in non-intact alveolar sockets with favorable outcomes. The purpose of this study is to present an approach on IIP in sites with buccal bone dehiscence.

METHODS

Three patients requiring extraction of one or multiple teeth in the presence of buccal bone dehiscence were treated with flapless extractions, IIP, guided bone regeneration (GBR), and connective tissue grafting (CTG) through a tunneling approach with a simultaneous use of custom healing abutments.

RESULTS

All sites exhibited 1-2 mm of buccal bone thickness at the level of the implant platform, as well as significant buccal soft tissue thickness with no recession and a favorable development of the emergence profile at 4 months to a year post implant placement.

CONCLUSIONS

IIP in sockets with buccal bone dehiscence can be managed by means of a flapless extraction, GBR and CTG through a tunneling approach exhibiting favorable hard and soft tissue responses.

KEY POINTS

When placing immediate implants in non-intact sockets, simultaneous connective tissue grafting is recommended, especially in the esthetic zone. Bone grafting in immediate implants in sockets with buccal bone dehiscence can be performed through a tunneling approach without the need for open flap approaches. Placement of CHAs over immediate implants may help promote maintenance of the buccolingual ridge contours and overall hard and soft tissue responses.

PLAIN LANGUAGE SUMMARY

Placing dental implants right after tooth extraction can lead to more visible aesthetic issues, especially gum recession. This is more common when the tooth socket is not intact or the gum tissue is thin. However, several techniques have shown good results even in these challenging situations. This study explores a method for implant placement right after tooth extraction in cases where there is bone missing on the socket. Three patients who needed teeth extracted and had bone loss on the outer side of their tooth sockets were treated. The treatment included: Extracting the teeth without cutting the gums, placing implants immediately, using GBR to help regrow bone, adding connective tissue grafts, and using custom healing cups to shape the gum tissue. After treatment, all the sites showed 1-2 mm of new bone on the outer side of the implants and thicker gum tissue without any recession. The gum and bone around the implants looked good 4 months to a year later. In conclusion, IIP in sockets with bone loss on the outer side can be effectively managed with this method, leading to good bone and gum tissue outcomes.

Comparing the modified socket-shield technique with the conventional immediate implantation technique in the anterior dentition: A 5-year retrospective clinical study

AIMS

The aim of this retrospective clinical study was to compare the 5-year radiological and clinical outcomes of patients undergoing immediate implantation with or without the modified socket-shield technique.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Patients who underwent anterior tooth replacement via the modified socket-shield technique (MSST) or the conventional immediate implantation technique (CIIT) between 2016 and 2017 were included. The labial bone thickness was assessed at different measurement levels (0, 2, 4 and 6 mm apical to the implant shoulder (IS)) postoperatively (T1), 6 months postoperatively (T2) and 5 years postoperatively (T3). The pink aesthetic score (PES) was evaluated before surgery (T0) and at T2 and T3. Implant success, complications and patient satisfaction were evaluated at every visit.

RESULTS

Thirty-six patients (18 in the MSST group) underwent follow-up for 5 years, with no cases of implant failure. Two cases of exposure were detected in the MSST group, but there were no significant effects on hard or soft tissue. Patients in the MSST group showed less and more stable bone resorption than did those in the CIIT group at any measurement level and any time. A higher PES was achieved in the MSST group. Patient satisfaction was similar in both groups.

CONCLUSIONS

The MSST is a reliable immediate implantation method because of its ability to preserve the alveolar bone and provide superior recovery of aesthetics.

Horizontal ridge augmentation in the maxillary aesthetic region using the autogenous circular cortical-lamina anchoring technique: A case series study

AIM

This case series aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of the autologous circular cortical lamina-anchoring (CCA) technique for horizontal bone augmentation in the maxillary aesthetic region.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A total of 25 patients with 28 implants underwent horizontal bone augmentation using CCA followed by implant placement and crown delivery. The primary outcome measures were alveolar ridge width (ARW) and buccal bone thickness (BBT), whereas the secondary outcome measures included marginal bone loss (MBL), mid-facial mucosal margin loss (MML), clinical assessment of peri-implant and aesthetic parameters, patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs), and implant survival rates.

RESULTS

All 25 patients with 28 implants completed the treatment, no dropouts occurred. After CCA, the mean ARW at 1, 2, and 4 mm below the alveolar crest significantly increased from 2.38 ± 0.48, 2.85 ± 0.51, and 3.21 ± 0.53 mm to 6.80 ± 0.48, 6.99 ± 0.50, and 8.08 ± 0.52 mm, respectively. At the 3-year follow-up, the mean BBT0, BBT2, and BBT4 slightly decreased from 2.51 ± 0.26, 2.63 ± 0.31, and 2.75 ± 0.29 mm to 2.43 ± 0.27, 2.51 ± 0.30, and 2.64 ± 0.28 mm, respectively. Although the overall MBL was <0.15 mm, the results were statistically significant. The mean MML at the 3-year follow-up was 0.02 mm. All implant sites showed acceptable peri-implant and aesthetic outcomes. Incisions healed without complications, and no significant differences in PROMs observed at any time point. The 3-year follow-up showed a 100% implant survival rate.

CONCLUSION

The autologous CCA technique is a useful method for increasing ARW and maintaining BBT in the maxillary aesthetic region.

Evaluation of buccal bone resorption in immediate implant placement in thin versus thick buccal bone plates: An 18-month follow-up prospective cohort study

OBJECTIVES

The current guidelines recommend that immediate implants be placed in patients with thick (>1 mm) buccal bone due to the inevitable tissue remodeling that follows tooth extraction. The aim of the current study was to investigate the effect of buccal bone thickness on bone resorption in immediate implant placement and compare two measuring techniques of the aforementioned resorption.

MATERIALS

The present study was designed as a prospective nonrandomized, controlled clinical trial. A total of 30 implants were split between the two study arms, thin buccal bone and thick buccal bone. The primary outcome was to assess vertical bone changes radiographically by cone beam scans preoperatively, at 2 months and 18 months after implant placement in patients with thin and thick buccal plate. Secondary outcomes included the change in the thickness of the buccal bony plate, marginal bone loss, and pink esthetic score.

RESULTS

Only 26 implants were statistically analyzed as one early failure was observed in each group. Furthermore, 2 patients of the thick group withdrew from the study. Cone beam computed tomography measurements revealed that at 2 months the vertical bone loss was 1.09 for the thin group and 0.85 for the thick group. The buccal bone plate resorption of the thin group was 0.39 mm while it was 0.52 mm for the thick group. The buccal bone plate was 1.25 mm in the thin group and 1.88 mm in the thick group. The PES did not show any significant difference with very good esthetic results.

CONCLUSION

Within the limitations of the current study, the amount of buccal bone plate resorption and the subsequent thickness obtained after implantation in both groups suggest successful long-term results. The two measuring techniques have proven to be comparable and reliable in the measurement of buccal bony plate changes. https://classic.

CLINICALTRIALS

gov/ct2/results?cond=&term=NCT04731545&cntry=EG&state=&city=&dist=.

IMMEDIATE IMPLANT PLACEMENT WITH A SIMULTANEOUS BONE AUGMENTATION OF THE GAP-FILLING SITES CAN POTENTIALLY DECREASE BONE LOSS COMPARED WITH AUGMENTED SITES EXHIBITING GAPS WITH BONY DEFECTS

ARTICLE TITLE AND BIBLIOGRAPHIC INFORMATION

Marginal bone level change of immediately restored implants with simultaneous guided bone regeneration: A systematic review. Lin, X., Yu, X., Wang, F., & Wu, Y. Clinical Implant Dentistry and Related Research 2023.

SOURCE OF FUNDING

CAMS Innovation Fund for Medical Sciences (CIFMS), Grant/Award Number: 2019-I2M- 5-037; Clinical Research Plan of SHDC, Grant/Award Number: SHDC2020CR3049B; Huangpu District Industrial Support Fund, Grant/Award Number: XK2020014; Research Discipline Fund, Grant/Award Number: KQYJXK2020.

TYPE OF STUDY/DESIGN

Systematic review.

The bone shielding versus dual-zone concept in treating thin-walled fresh extraction sockets with immediate implant placement: Soft and hard tissue changes. A randomized clinical trial

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the ridge alterations and esthetic outcome 1 year after immediate implant placement using the dual-zone (DZ) technique versus the bone shielding concept in patients with intact thin-walled sockets in the esthetic zone.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

This randomized clinical trial included 26 patients with nonrestorable maxillary teeth in the esthetic zone who were randomly assigned to two groups (n = 13 each) to receive immediate implants using either the bone shielding concept or DZ. Definitive restorations were delivered after 2 months. Pink esthetic scores (PESs), vertical soft tissue alterations, and bucco-palatal ridge dimensional changes were measured and assessed using intra-oral digital scans at baseline and 1 year post-procedure. Labial bone thickness was measured using cone beam computed tomography scans at baseline and after 1 year.

RESULTS

The bone shielding group provided bucco-palatal ridge thickness stability after 1 year (9.43 mm) compared to baseline values (9.82 mm), while DZ showed a significant loss in the bucco-palatal ridge thickness after 1 year (7.83) compared to baseline values (9.49). No significant difference was reported in the baseline bucco-palatal ridge thickness between the two groups (p = 0.6). After 1 year, the bone shielding group demonstrated 0.38 mm ridge shrinkage which was statistically significant (p = 0.0002) compared to 1.67 mm ridge shrinkage in the DZ group. In addition, the average total PES in the bone shielding group was 12.04 versus 10.28 in the DZ group. No significant difference was reported in the mesial papilla length between the DZ and the bone shielding group after 1 year (p > 0.05). However, the midfacial gingival margin (p = 0.026) and distal papilla were significantly higher in the DZ group (p = 0.0025). There was no significant difference in the mean ± SD mm bone gain at the apical level between the two studied groups after 1 year (p = 0.06) showing 0.85 ± 0.23 and 0.64 ± 0.32 mm, respectively. However, the bone shielding concept showed a statistically significant more bone gain mm (p < 0.001) at the (0.56 ± 0.43) and crestal (0.03 ± 0.8) levels after 1 year compared to DZ which revealed 0.18 ± 0.5 and 0.38 ± 0.29 mm bone loss, respectively.

CONCLUSION

The bone shielding concept might offer a reliable alternative for restoring thin-walled sockets by minimizing postextraction ridge dimensional alterations effect following immediate implant placement in the esthetic zone. Nevertheless, the study suffers from confounding bias since there are two systematic differences between the groups, the barrier membrane type, and the level of bone filling. "This clinical trial was not registered prior to participant recruitment and randomization."

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION

NCT05381467.

Accuracy and patient-centered results of marker-based and marker-free registrations for dynamic computer-assisted implant surgery: A randomized controlled trial

OBJECTIVES

To compare implant placement accuracy and patient-centered results between the dynamic computer-assisted implant surgeries (d-CAISs) using marker-based and marker-free registration methods.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A double-armed, single-blinded randomized controlled trial was conducted, in which 34 patients requiring single implant placement at the esthetic zone were randomly assigned to the marker-based (n = 17) or marker-free (n = 17) groups. The marker-based registration was performed using a splint containing radiopaque markers, while the marker-free registration used natural teeth. The primary outcome assessed implant positioning accuracy via angular and linear deviations between preoperative and postoperative implant positions in CBCT. Patients were also surveyed about the intraoperative experience and oral health impact profile (OHIP).

RESULTS

The global linear deviations at the implant platform (0.82 ± 0.28 and 0.85 ± 0.41 mm) and apex (1.28 ± 0.34 and 0.85 (IQR: 0.64-1.50) mm) for the marker-based and marker-free groups respectively showed no significant difference. However, the angular deviation of the marker-free group (2.77 ± 0.92° ) was significantly lower than the marker-based group (4.28 ± 1.58° ). There was no significant difference in the mean postoperative OHIP scores between the two groups (p = .758), with scores of 2.74 ± 1.21 for marker-based and 2.93 ± 2.18 for marker-free groups, indicating mild oral health-related impairment in both. Notably, patients in the marker-free group showed significantly higher satisfaction (p = .031) with the treatment procedures.

CONCLUSIONS

D-CAIS with a marker-free registration method for single implantation in the anterior maxilla has advantages in improving implant placement accuracy and patients' satisfaction, without generating a significant increase in clinical time and expenses.

Clinical efficacy of soft-tissue augmentation on tissue preservation at immediate implant sites: A randomized controlled trial

AIM

This randomized controlled trial aimed to investigate the efficacy of soft-tissue augmentation (STA) with a subepithelial connective tissue graft (SCTG) or an acellular dermal matrix (ADM) on reducing tissue alterations at an immediate implant site.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This trial had three groups: (i) immediate implant with SCTG (ICT group); (ii) immediate implant with ADM (IAD group); (iii) immediate implant without STA (control group). Forty-six patients were randomly assigned to each group. Implants were placed at the maxillary anterior or premolar areas and restored after the 6-month visit. Clinical outcomes, including buccal soft-tissue contour, peri-implant mucosal level, soft-tissue thickness and keratinized tissue width, were measured at baseline and at 3-, 6- and 12-month follow-up visits. Radiographic bone levels were measured at baseline and at 6- and 12-month follow-up visits. Patient-reported outcomes were also collected.

RESULTS

STA procedures increased peri-implant mucosal thickness and maintained buccal soft-tissue contours. Compared to the control group, STA groups did not prevent peri-implant mucosal recession or interproximal bone resorption. Generally, no significant differences in clinical outcomes were detected between the ICT and IAD groups. Most patients were highly satisfied with the immediate implant procedure and outcomes without significant differences between groups.

CONCLUSIONS

STA at immediate implant sites enhanced soft-tissue thickness and maintained soft-tissue contours but did not prevent peri-implant mucosal recession or interproximal bone resorption. Long-term follow-up should be performed since these results were reported for only up to 1 year.

Avoiding errors and complications related to immediate implant placement in the esthetic area with a mucogingival approach

Immediate implant placement is considered the treatment of choice for single tooth replacement in the esthetic area. However, this treatment is associated with several critical drawbacks related to the inadequate assessment/management of the soft and hard peri-implant tissues and their subsequent remodeling, resulting in peri-implant soft-tissue defects that can lead to impaired esthetic outcomes in time. We describe in detail how the mucogingival approach to immediate implant placement ensures a standard result regardless of the baseline soft-hard tissue situation. Fully guided implant placement guarantees an adequate three-dimensional implant placement, the flap design makes it possible to perform bone augmentation with complete visibility of the area being treated, allows soft tissue augmentation with proper fixation of the connective tissue graft, and the placement of an immediate provisional ensures stabilization of the peri-implant tissues throughout the healing period.

Immediate Implant and Customized Healing Abutment for a Periodontally Compromised Socket: 1-Year Follow-Up Retrospective Evaluation

Immediate dental implant placement with or without immediate loading is reported in daily dentistry and implantology, but these procedures are not common in the case of periradicular and periapical lesions around the tooth needed to be replaced. In the following retrospective evaluation, 10 cases with a 1-year follow-up were selected to propose the technique of an immediate provisional non-loading prosthesis being delivered on the same day of the post-extraction implant placement in multiradicular teeth affected by chronic periradicular and periapical lesions. Post-extractive sockets underwent immediate dental implant placement by filling the empty space with sterile, re-absorbable gelatin sponges. The widths of the alveolar ridge were measured on three-dimensional radiographs before and after the operation, 4 and 12 months later. Non-parametric statistics were performed to compare the outcomes over time with a level of significance of 0.05. Comparing the preoperative cross-sectional images of cone beam computerized tomography (CBCT) scans to the postoperative ones, it was noted that changes in the crestal ridge width, ΔCW, (compared to baseline) were negligible and not clinically appreciable. However, while ΔCW at 4 months appeared to be negative (-0.17 ± 045 mm), crestal width at 12 months was at the same level as the baseline (ΔCW = 0.02 ± 0.48 mm), with a significant difference between 4 and 12 months (p-value = 0.0494). Immediate implant placement with an immediate non-loading provisional customized healing abutment of polyether-ether-ketone placed into the post-extractive sockets with asymptomatic and large chronic periapical and periradicular lesions could represent a further treatment strategy for patients' rehabilitation and soft tissue preservation to replace a hopeless tooth.

Buccal bone thickness and mid-facial soft tissue recession after various surgical approaches for immediate implant placement: A systematic review and network meta-analysis of controlled trials

AIM

To evaluate the relative efficacy and confidence in the precision of the results of different surgical interventions for immediate implant placement in the anterior area.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Electronic searches were performed in PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane CENTRAL. Randomized controlled trials comparing different surgical techniques in anterior jaws for type 1 implant placement were included. Outcome measures included implant survival (primary outcome), buccal bone thickness (BBT) reduction, and mid-facial soft tissue recession (MSTR). Risks of bias assessment, network meta-analysis (NMA), sensitivity analysis, and quality-of-evidence assessment were performed.

RESULTS

Twenty-two studies reporting on 948 subjects and 5 surgical interventions were included. Fourteen early failures were reported. Compared with open-flap surgery without tissue augmentation (F-N) and looking at BBT preservation, NMA showed that there was moderate confidence that flapless surgery with hard tissue augmentation (FL-HTA) was better than flapless surgery without tissue augmentation (FL-N) or open-flap surgery with hard tissue augmentation (F-HTA) (mean difference -0.8 mm, 95% confidence interval: -1.1 to -0.5 mm; -0.6 mm, -0.9 to -0.4 mm; and -0.5 mm, -0.7 to -0.3 mm, respectively). There was moderate confidence that flapless surgery with hard and soft tissue augmentation (FL-HTA&STA) could significantly prevent MSTR compared with FL-HTA (-0.5 mm, -0.7 to -0.3 mm) and FL-N (-0.6 mm, -1.2 to -0.04 mm). However, there was no significant additional benefit in BBT with the FL-HTA&STA approach compared to the FL-HTA approach (-0.30 mm, -0.81 to 0.21 mm).

CONCLUSIONS

For immediate implant placement in the anterior areas, the FL-HTA approach better preserves BBT (moderate confidence); adding STA improves the stability of the mid-facial soft tissue level (moderate confidence) but at the expense of BBT (low confidence).

Effect of the buccal gap width following immediate implant placement on the buccal bone wall: A retrospective cone-beam computed tomography analysis

BACKGROUND

The effect of the buccal gap width on the clinical outcome of socket graft and immediate implant placement (IIP) at maxillary central incisor sites has not been investigated. Thus, the aim of the present study was to evaluate the effect of the width of the buccal gap on the thickness of the newly formed buccal wall.

METHODS

Forty-two patients and 51 maxillary central incisor sites treated with IIP and ridge preservation by means of graft of the buccal gap at the maxillary central incisor region were included in the study. The width of the buccal gap was measured and filled with deproteinized bovine bone mineral. Implant sites were divided into two groups: wide gap (WG, >2 mm; n = 34) and narrow gap (NG, ≤2 mm; n = 17). After at least 1 year in function (5 ± 4), CBCT scans were obtained and assessed by a calibrated examiner. The thickness of the buccal and palatal bone walls, the percentage of the implant height covered by bone in the buccal and palatal aspects and the position of the buccal and palatal crests were compared between the two groups. A linear regression model was performed to assess predictors of the thickness of the buccal bone.

RESULTS

The buccal bone was significantly thicker in the WG group than the NG group at all levels observed (overall 1.9 ± 0.9 mm and 0.5 ± 0.6 mm, respectively). The thickness of the palatal bone was similar between both groups (>2 mm). The percentage of the implant height covered by bone at the buccal aspect was significantly higher in the WG group (95 ± 16.6%) than in the NG group (59.4 ± 42.3%). The position of the buccal crest in relation to the implant shoulder was significantly more coronal (0.3 ± 2.2 mm) in the WG group than in the NG group (-4.7 ± 5.6 mm). The regression analysis model indicated that the width of the buccal gap was the only predictor of the thickness of the newly formed buccal bone wall (p < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

Grafting of >2 mm-wide buccal gaps following IIP promoted a thicker buccal bone wall.