Immediate and flapless implant insertion and provisionalization using autogenous bone grafts in the esthetic zone: 5-year results

The influence of connective tissue grafting on the reconstruction of a missing facial bone wall using immediate implant placement and simultaneous bone reconstruction: a retrospective long-term cohort study

PURPOSE

This retrospective cohort study evaluates the influence of connective tissue grafts (CTG) on bone regeneration at implant sites with total loss of the buccal bone wall treated with flapless immediate implant placement (IIP) and reconstruction with autogenous bone chips (AB) within a follow-up of up to 13 years.

METHODS

Sixty implants were inserted in 55 patients in sites with total loss of the buccal bone wall between 2008 and 2021. The implants were inserted and the buccal gaps were grafted by AB. A subgroup of 34 sites was grafted additionally with CTG using tunnel technique. Primary outcome was the vertical bone regeneration in height and thickness. Secondary outcome parameters were interproximal marginal bone level, recession, soft tissue esthetics (PES), width of keratinized mucosa (KMW) and probing depths (PPD).

RESULTS

Mean follow-up period was 60.8 months. In 55 sites a complete vertical bone regeneration was documented. The mean buccal bone level increased by 10.6 mm significantly. The thickness of the buccal bone wall ranged between 1.7 and 1.9 mm, and was significantly thicker in sites without CTG. Interproximal marginal bone level was at implant shoulder level. The mean recession improved significantly by 1.2 mm. In sites with CTG, recessions and PES improved significantly more.

CONCLUSIONS

Additional CTG in extraction sites with total buccal bone loss followed by IIP with simultaneous AB grafting led to improved PES and recession, but also to a thinner buccal bone wall compared to sites grafted just with AB.

Immediate loading in partially edentulous patients with fixed implant-supported restorations cases report

Objectives

This article reports on four rare cases involving multiple trauma-induced adjacent missing anterior teeth in the maxillary or mandibular region. These cases were successfully treated using a 4-axial implant-based alternative insert and an immediate loading protocol.

Material and methods

This series of cases was summarized by retrospective study that 4 patients who received a total of 20 immediately loaded implants. These patients had suffered from trauma-induced loss of 8-9 adjacent anterior teeth. The 4-axial-implants were inserted with the assistance of digital pioneer drill guides. The surgical procedure involved alveolar bone trimming or ultrasonic osteotomy, eliminating the need for traditional large-area bone augmentation. Pre- and post-operative CBCT was matched using DTX Studio Implant software, the deviation of implant between actual position and preoperative design was measured and compared using SPSS software package.

Results

The average follow-up duration 48 months after implant prostheses, the cumulative retention rate of the implants was 100%, the marginal bone loss averaged 0.53 mm (SD 0.15 mm), and buccal plate bone loss averaged 0.62 mm (SD 0.41 mm).

Conclusions

This retrospective clinical report demonstrates the successful treatment of several patients with multiple adjacent maxillary or mandibular anterior teeth using four implant-supported screws to fix the frame and employing immediate loading. The approach resulted in long-term stable clinical outcomes. Moreover, the method not only shortens the period of edentulism but also facilitates easy disassembly, maintenance, and cleaning. Consequently, it emerges as a highly favorable clinical option for patients suffering from extensive tooth loss.

Effectiveness of immediate implant placement into defective sockets in the esthetic zone: A systematic review and meta-analysis

STATEMENT OF PROBLEM

A defective socket is common after tooth extraction in the esthetic zone, but whether an implant can be immediately placed in a defective socket is unclear.

PURPOSE

The purpose of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to summarize relevant studies within the last 20 years on implant survival and changes in soft and hard tissues after immediate implant placement in esthetic areas with socket defects.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

A search was conducted for the relevant studies in the PubMed/Medline, the Cochrane Library, Web of Science, and Embase databases from January 2000 to March 2022. The literature review, data retrieval, and judgment whether the included studies had a risk of bias were handled independently by 2 reviewers, and a single-arm meta-analysis was performed using a statistical software program.

RESULTS

A total of 23 studies evaluating the immediate implant placement of 630 implants (9 studies without a flap and 14 studies with a flap) were included. A 98.1% implant survival rate (95% confidence interval (CI): 96.2%, 100.0%) was determined. Marginal bone loss (MBL) at 6, 12, and ≥24 months were 1.03 mm (95%CI: 1.02, 1.03), 0.72 mm (0.72, 0.73), and 1.15 mm (1.14, 1.16). Gingival recession at 12 months was 0.25 mm (95%CI: 0.17, 0.33). The pink esthetic score (PES) were 12.34 (95%CI: 12.16, 12.52) at 12 months and 12.58 (12.39, 12.76) at ≥24 months.

CONCLUSIONS

Current evidence shows that immediate implant placement into defective sockets in esthetic areas is feasible. Immediate implant placement can have a relatively good therapeutic effect in terms of implant survival rate, MBL, gingival recession, and PES.

Impact of immediate interim restoration on peri-implant tissues around immediately placed single dental implants in the esthetic region: A systematic review and meta-analysis

STATEMENT OF PROBLEM

Immediate implant placement with an immediate interim restoration is a well-established protocol. Nevertheless, a consensus regarding the impact of immediate interim restoration on peri-implant tissues around single dental implants is lacking.

PURPOSE

The purpose of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to address the research question: "Does the placement of an immediate interim restoration influence the mid-facial mucosal (MFM) marginal and interdental papilla (IDP) levels around single dental implants placed in the anterior esthetic region by using an immediate implant placement protocol?"

MATERIAL AND METHODS

A comprehensive literature search was made in the Medline/PubMed, Scopus, Cochrane, and Science Direct electronic databases for articles published in English evaluating the impact of immediate interim restoration on peri-implant tissues around single dental implants in the anterior esthetic region. The primary outcomes assessed were changes in the MFM marginal and IDP levels. Additional outcomes were marginal bone (MB) loss, esthetic outcomes involving the pink and white esthetic scores (PES and WES), implant survival rates, and patient reported outcome measures (PROMs). The risk of bias assessment was performed by using the RoB 2 tool for randomized trials and the Newcastle-Ottawa scale for nonrandomized studies. Meta-analysis was performed by using random and fixed effects model (α=.05) in the RevMan software program.

RESULTS

Sixteen studies were included that analyzed 836 single dental implants involving 823 patients. The meta-analysis showed no significant differences in implants with and without interim restoration in terms of MFM marginal level (MD=0.01; 95% CI=-1.23 to 1.25; P=.98), mesial IDP level (MD=0.12; 95% CI=-0.23 to 0.47; P=.50), distal IDP level (MD=0.20; 95% CI=-0.40 to 0.79; P=.52), and MB loss (MD=0.01; 95% CI=-0.42 to 0.43; P=.97). The systematic analysis for survival rates determined no notable difference in implants with or without an interim restoration. However, the esthetic outcomes and PROMs substantially improved with immediate interim restorations. The RoB 2 tool showed a moderate to low risk of bias, and the Newcastle-Ottawa scale indicated high-quality studies.

CONCLUSIONS

After a 12-month follow-up, immediate interim restoration had no significant impact on peri-implant soft (MFM marginal and IDP levels) and hard tissues (MB loss) around immediately placed single dental implants. Nevertheless, additional well-designed and well-implemented clinical trials with long-term follow-up periods are needed to provide more precise evidence-based recommendations.

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.

Marginal bone level change of immediately restored implants with simultaneous guided bone regeneration: A systematic review

AIM

To assess marginal bone level change (MBLc), clinical outcomes for soft tissue, and survival rates for immediately restored implants with simultaneous guided bone regeneration (GBR).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Electronic and manual searches were conducted in PubMed/MEDLINE, EMBASE, and CENTRAL for studies that investigated immediately restored implants in simultaneously grafted sites with a mean follow-up of over 12 months. MBLc was the primary outcome. Soft tissue clinical parameters and implant survival rate (ISR) were the secondary outcomes.

RESULTS

Twenty-five studies (5 randomized controlled trials, 6 prospective studies, 2 retrospective studies, and 12 case series) were included, from which 692 immediately restored implants were analyzed. For studies that investigated bone grafts in the gap between the implant and the peripheral bone wall, the weighted mean MBLc was -0.73 ± 1.52 mm (range: -1.50 to 0.26 mm) for 475 implants. Pink esthetic score (PES) was improved in eight studies and the weighted cumulative ISR was 98.99% (Median: 100%) in 622 implants. Mean MBLc was -1.19 ± 0.26 mm for 30 implants in studies that reported gap with dehiscence and/or fenestration augmentation. Weighted cumulative ISR was 97.25% in 70 implants. A meta-analysis was not possible due to the lack of studies with an eligible control group. Therefore, the data should be interpreted with caution.

CONCLUSION

Less marginal bone loss and more predictable soft tissue parameters can be achieved for immediately restored implants with simultaneous peri-implant gap filling compared with gap with dehiscence/fenestration grafting. Increased ISR for implants with gap filling was observed. However, more evidence is needed to confirm whether immediate provisional prostheses should be utilized when bone defects are simultaneously augmented around the implants.

Guided immediate implant with and without using a mixture of autogenous and xeno bone grafts in the dental esthetic zone. A randomized clinical trial

PURPOSE

This in vivo study aims to assess the pink esthetic score in the anterior maxilla after computer-guided immediate implant installation and fully digital immediate temporalization with and without grafting the jumping gap with a mixture of 1:1 autogenous and xenograft particulates.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Twenty-four patients with non-restorable upper anterior teeth in the aesthetic zone have undergone a traumatic extraction for the non-restorable tooth followed by immediate implant placement using a 3D-printed surgical guide according to prosthetically driven implant placement. The patients were divided into two groups. The study group received the dental implant after grafting the jumping gap with 1:1 autogenous and xenograft particulates, while the control group received the dental implant without grafting the jumping gap. Each patient received a digitally fabricated, immediate, nonfunctional temporary prosthesis. The esthetic outcome was compared between the two groups using the pink esthetic score at implant insertion and after 6 months of follow-up. Statistical comparisons were carried out between the studied groups using the Mann-Whitney U test.

RESULTS

Immediately postoperatively, there was no statistically significant difference between the median PES in the two groups (P-value = 0.746). After six months, the study group showed a statistically significantly higher median PES than the control group (P-value = 0.048).

CONCLUSIONS

Grafting the jumping distance in the immediate implant protocol helps achieve a better esthetic outcome.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

The use of immediate guided implant placement along with grafting the jumping gap followed by immediate digital temporalization guarantees a better esthetic outcome while preserving time, cost, and the number of clinical visits.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

The study was registered on clinicaltrials.gov with registration number NCT04096209. (19/9/2019).

Volumetric analysis on the use of customized healing abutments with or without connective tissue graft at flapless maxillary immediate implant placement: A randomized clinical trial

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate buccal volume change after using a customized healing abutment with or without connective tissue grafts (CTG) in flapless maxillary immediate implant placement (IIP).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The present study was designed as a randomized clinical trial (RCT). Patients treated with flapless maxillary IIP were allocated into two groups, both receiving a customized healing abutment, and additionally, the test group received a CTG. A cone-beam computerized tomography (CBCT) allowed to access the initial buccal bone thickness (BT). Digital impressions were taken prior to extractions (T0), 1 month (T1), 4 months (T2), and 12 months (T3) after implant insertion and superimposed with computer software allowing to compute variables related to buccal volume variation (BVv) and total volume variation (TVv) (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT05060055).

RESULTS

Thirty-two patients (mean age 48 ± 11 years), sixteen in each group, were evaluated after a 12-month period. After 1 year of treatment, no significant differences were found between groups, although in participants with BT ≤1 mm, control and test groups showed a BVv of -14.18 ± 3.49% and -8.30 ± 3.78%, respectively (p = .033). Regarding mucosa height variation variables, the control group showed approximately the triple vertical recession in both papillae.

CONCLUSIONS

The placement of a CTG was not capable of completely maintaining the initial peri-implant tissue architecture, although in thin-bone phenotypes, less dimensional changes are expected when a CTG was used.

Selection criteria for immediate implant placement and immediate loading for single tooth replacement in the maxillary esthetic zone: A systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this study was to review available evidence for Type 1A (immediate implant placement and immediate loading) of single tooth replacement in the maxillary esthetic zone.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

An electronic search was conducted utilizing the databases of MEDLINE, Embase, and Cochrane to identify publications reporting on the outcomes of Type 1A for single tooth replacement in the maxillary esthetic zone. The success and survival rates of the included articles were reported, which were further categorized according to the clinical criteria reported in Type 1A. Mean survival rates were univariately compared between risk groups and additionally between studies published before and since 2012 using bias-corrected and study size-weighed bootstrap tests. A study time-correcting meta-analysis was then performed to obtain an overall effect for the study pool.

RESULTS

A total of 3118 publications were identified in the search, with a total of 68 articles included. A mean number of implants per study were 37.2 and mean follow-up was 2.8 years. All the included studies utilizing Type 1A report highly selective inclusion and exclusion criteria. Univariate risk group comparison determined that studies before 2012 report a significantly lower mean survival rate (difference of -1.9 percentage points [PP], 95% CI: [-0.3, -4.0], p = .02), facial gap dimension had an impact on survival rates (+3.1 PP [0.2, 5.3] for width >2 mm, p = .04), as well as presence of endodontic infection (+2.6 PP [0.9, 5.1], p = .004).

CONCLUSIONS

Type 1A has a high survival rate in studies reporting strict patient and site selection criteria. Further research is required to assess esthetic and functional success with Type 1A treatments.

Clinical and cone beam computed tomography outcomes of maxillary anterior implant restorations after immediate implant placement with interim restorations: A 1- to 14-year retrospective analysis

STATEMENT OF PROBLEM: Achieving and maintaining optimal tissue health and esthetics when immediately placing maxillary anterior implants with interim restorations has been challenging and the clinical outcomes heterogenous.

PURPOSE

The purpose of this retrospective study was to evaluate the clinical outcomes of immediate placement of maxillary anterior implants with interim restorations and compare the tomographic and clinical results before and after implant placement in participants followed for 1 to 14 years.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Twenty participants receiving 25 postextraction single implants in the anterior maxilla were studied. Clinical parameters included pink esthetic score (PES) and white esthetic score (WES), peri-implant phenotype, implant probing, plaque index, and cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) to compare initial and at least 1 year after crown placement (postoperative). For qualitative variables, a descriptive analysis was carried out. The PES and WES results were analyzed by using nonparametric statistics, the median (ME) and the interquartile range (IQR) were used as summary measures, and the Wilcoxon sum of signs test was used to compare the total scores between the intervention area and the contralateral tooth. To compare pre- and postoperative data points, the paired t test was used (α=.05).

RESULTS

Mean ±standard deviation (SD) time of follow-up was 7.6 ±4.2 years. Twenty participants with a mean ±SD age of 62.4 ±11.0 years old received 25 implants. Mean ±SD initial torque value at implant placement was 38.6 ±9.63 Ncm. Bone height at the top of the alveolar ridge (BH) and bone width at the middle of the alveolar ridge (BW2) showed a statistically significant decrease between the initial and subsequent CBCT measurements (both P<.001). Likewise, the bone width at the alveolar crest (BW1) showed a statistically significant decrease between the initial and post-CBCT measurements (P=.006). Facial bone integrity (FBI) revealed a statistically significant increase between the initial and postoperative time periods (P<.001). The PES index showed a median of 9.0 IQR (8-10), statistically lower than the contralateral tooth (P=.032). No significant differences were found for the WES index or for FBI, regardless of the peri-implant phenotype.

CONCLUSIONS

Immediate implant placement in the maxillary anterior sextant was found to be a predictable procedure with good esthetic results when the protocol described was used. Labial bone loss is inevitable after tooth extraction but can be compensated for by filling the space with a xenograft material. Long-term gingival tissue integrity was maintained, regardless of phenotype, in periodontally healthy participants.

Factors Associated with Esthetic Outcomes of Flapless Immediate Placed and Loaded Implants in the Maxillary Incisor Region—Three-Year Results of a Prospective Case Series

Flapless immediate implant placement and provisionalization (FIIPP) is often associated with an increased risk of buccal soft-tissue recession. This study aims to assess the 3-year esthetic outcome. In 100 consecutive patients, one maxillary incisor, with or without a pre-extraction buccal bone defect (≤5 mm), was replaced by an implant installed in a maximal palatal position (buccal gap ≥2 mm). The created gaps were filled with bovine bone substitute. Patient satisfaction (PS), pink esthetic scores (PES/modPES), and white esthetic score (WES) were calculated at different time points. A multilevel regression analysis (MRA) was performed to analyze which factors may be associated with the esthetics. After three years, PS scored 8.9 ± 0.84 on a scale of 10 (n = 83), and the soft-tissue esthetics were high (PES = 12.2; modPES = 8.5), as was the WES (8.2), showing no decrease from one year. Buccal bone defect size and smoking could not be associated with the soft-tissue outcome; however, implant location, gap size, and emergence profiles could. Performing FIIPP, the final crown (WES) scored highest when it was cemented, the soft tissue (PES/modPES) in central-incisor positions, and all (WES/PES/modPES) with concave emergence profiles.

The peri-implant mucosa color: A systematic appraisal of methods for its assessment and clinical significance

BACKGROUND

Peri-implant mucosa color (PMC) seems to be one of the main parameters affecting the esthetic outcome of implant therapy. However, more emphasis should be given to its assessment and reporting.

PURPOSE

To describe the available evidence on methods to assess and report the color of the peri-implant mucosa (PMC) and the respective clinical relevance.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

A comprehensive electronic and manual search was performed to identify clinical studies reporting on PMC.

RESULTS

A total of 121 studies were included. PMC was evaluated at the time of the follow-up visit (chairside) in 45.5% studies. PMC assessment was performed qualitatively, by comparing PMC with adjacent and/or contralateral gingiva (78.6%) or quantitatively, using spectrophotometry (20.7%) or a software on clinical photographs (0.8%). The most performed method to assess PMC was through esthetic indices (76.9%), either at the time of the follow-up visit (chairside) or at later time point using photographs. Quantitative reporting of PMC included averages of points from esthetic indices or color differences to natural gingiva expressed with the CIELAB color system. PMC assessment allowed describing color discrepancies compared to natural gingiva, evaluating color changes over time, and comparing the outcomes of different treatment modalities. PMC assessment through spectrophotometry was additionally utilized to assess the role of mucosal thickness (MT) on PMC.

CONCLUSIONS

Various methods for PMC assessment and reporting were described, including visual assessment, mainly through esthetic indices, and spectrophotometry. PMC evaluation has allowed to demonstrate the factors affecting the color of the peri-implant soft tissue, such as the type of abutment/restoration, MT, and soft tissue augmentation.

EFFECT OF AUTOGENOUS BONE GRAFT SITE ON DENTAL IMPLANT SURVIVAL AND DONOR SITE COMPLICATIONS: A SYSTEMATIC REVIEW AND META-ANALYSIS

OBJECTIVES

This systematic review and meta-analysis was undertaken to answer the following focus questions: Is the implant survival in augmented bone utilizing iliac crest bone grafts the same as while using intraoral autologous bone grafts? Is the incidence of postoperative donor site complications the same when using iliac crest bone grafts as opposed to intraoral grafts?

METHODS

Systematic searches of electronic databases (PubMed, Embase, CENTRAL) were performed to identify studies which reported on implant survival and postoperative complications for dental implants placed in grafted partially/completely edentulous human jaws. Studies were included if: they reported on 2-piece micro-rough surface root form dental implants placed in bone-augmented completely or partially edentulous human jaws, and the jaws must have been augmented with autologous bone graft materials. Time and nature of postoperative complications must have been reported. Two investigators performed data extraction and a Cohen's unweighted kappa was calculated for inter-investigator reliability. A meta-analysis was performed for the extracted data on implant survival rate in both iliac crest grafts and intra-oral grafts. A qualitative analysis was performed on the information extracted on graft donor site complications. Quality assessment of the included studies were done using the Cochrane collaboration tool and the Newcastle-Ottawa scales.

RESULTS

A total of 23 studies were included in the final analysis. The calculated kappa ranged between 0.77-0.89 for the literature search and identification process. Fourteen studies were included with data on implant survival including five randomized controlled clinical trials. The meta-analysis of included studies revealed that the implant survival rate of dental implants placed in jaws augmented with iliac crest grafts was lower than those placed in jaws augmented with intra-oral bone grafts at 6-months [ICG = 95.8% IOG = 98.4%; P < .001], 12-months [ICG = 97.0%, IOG = 98.4%; P < .001], 24-months [ICG = 85.9%, IOG = 98.2%; P < .001], 60-months [ICG = 90.0%, IOG = 91.5%; P < .001], and at 120-months [ICG = 88.8%, IOG = 95.2%; P < .001] follow-up periods. Iliac crest grafts were also frequently associated with donor site complications including pain / discomfort, gait disturbance, and sensory disturbance.

CONCLUSIONS

This systematic review and meta-analysis demonstrates that implant survival is consistently higher in bone harvested from intraoral sites compared to iliac crest grafts. Donor site complications seemed to be a frequent finding with iliac crest grafts and mental grafts.

FUNDING

None.

REGISTRATION

The review protocol was registered with PROSPERO: International prospective register of systematic reviews (CRD42021283738).

Clinical evaluation of the buccal aspect around immediate implant using dual zone therapeutic concept versus buccal gap fill to bone level: A randomized controlled clinical trial

OBJECTIVE

Soft tissue esthetics for immediate implant is considered challenging when restoring a tooth in an esthetic zone. This study aimed to evaluate the buccal aspect after immediate implant using the dual-zone therapeutic concept compared to grafting the buccal gap to the bone crest.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Twenty-four patients were randomly assigned into either immediate implant with the dual-zone therapeutic concept (DZ, test group) or with bone grafting till buccal bone crest with immediate temporization (BCG, control group). Pink esthetic score (PES), buccal bone loss (BBL), mid-facial recession (MFR), soft tissue thickness (STT), keratinized tissue width (KTW), post-operative swelling (POS), and patient satisfaction (PS) were evaluated for 1 year.

RESULTS

At 12 months the PES in the test group was 11.36 ± 1.69, and 10.80 ± 1.55 in the control group, with no statistically significant difference (p = 0.45). MFR in the DZ and BCG groups was 0.27 ± 0.34 and 0.45 ± 0.44 after 12 months with no statistical significance difference (p = 0.195). The STT assessment showed a statistically significant increase in both groups, however the intergroup comparison was statistically not significant (p = 0.23). The mean KTW in the DZ and BCG groups was 4.55 ± 1.08 and 4.20 ± 0.82 mm, respectively with no statistical significance (p = 0.42). There was no statistical significant difference in patient satisfaction between the two groups except in question number 10 concerning the post-operative swelling which was higher in the DZ group (p = 0.009).

CONCLUSIONS

Both treatment modalities are considered reliable methods to achieve good soft tissue esthetics. However, both treatment modalities were not effective in preventing facial bone resorption despite the use of bone graft.

Immediate implant placement with or without socket grafting: A systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effect of grafting the gap (SG) between the implant surface and alveolar socket on hard and soft tissue changes following single immediate implant placement (IIP).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Two independent reviewers conducted an electronic literature search in Pubmed, Web of Science, Embase and Cochrane databases as well as a manual search to identify eligible clinical studies up to August 2021. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing IIP with and without SG were included for a qualitative analysis. Meta-analyses were performed when possible.

RESULTS

Out of 3627 records, 15 RCTs were selected and reported on 577 patients who received 604 single immediate implants (IIP + SG: 298 implants in 292 patients; IIP: 306 implants in 285 patients) with a mean follow-up ranging from 4 to 36 months. Two RCTs showed low risk of bias. Meta-analysis revealed 0.59 mm (95% CI [0.41; 0.78], p < 0.001) or 54% less horizontal buccal bone resorption following IIP + SG when compared to IIP alone. In addition, 0.58 mm (95% CI [0.28; 0.88], p < 0.001) less apical migration of the midfacial soft tissue level was found when immediate implants were installed with SG. A trend towards less distal papillary recession was found (MD 0.60 mm, 95% CI [-0.08; 1.28], p = 0.080) when SG was performed, while mesial papillae appeared not significantly affected by SG. Vertical buccal bone changes were also not significantly affected by SG. Insufficient data were available for meta-analyses on horizontal midfacial soft tissue changes, pink esthetic score, marginal bone level changes, probing depth and bleeding on probing. Based on GRADE guidelines, a moderate recommendation for SG following IIP can be made.

CONCLUSION

SG may contribute to horizontal bone preservation and soft tissue stability at the midfacial aspect of immediate implants. Therefore, SG should be considered as an adjunct to IIP in clinical practice.

The soft tissue esthetic outcome with and without immediate provisionalization in immediate implants: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Aim

This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed at checking influences of immediate provisionalization on the primary esthetic outcome by Pink Esthetic Score (PES) as well as other secondary soft tissue outcomes such as bleeding on probing, probing depth, plaque index, mesial papillary recession, distal papillary recession, and midfacial mucosal recession of the peri-implant mucosa around immediately placed implants in the anterior maxilla.

Setting and Design

This systematic review and meta-analysis was evaluated using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis guidelines.

Materials and Methods

The relevant studies were found in the databases such as MEDLINE (PubMed), the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Science Direct, and Google Scholar. The search was restricted to studies published in English only, with no time constraints. A second hand search was conducted on individual journals and study reference lists. The Evidence Project risk-of-bias tool was used to assess the risk of bias in included studies. The level of evidence was determined using the GRADEpro GDT: GRADEpro Guideline Development Tool (software). McMaster University, 2020 (developed by Evidence Prime, Inc.,).

Statistical Analysis Used

The statistical meta-analysis was conducted by using Review Manager (RevMan) (Computer Program). Version 5.4. Copenhagen: The Nordic Cochrane Centre, the Cochrane Collaboration, 2020.

Results

Nine studies were finalized. Seven studies were selected out of nine in the meta-analysis for PES. The results of the current meta-analysis for primary outcome observed that immediate implant placement (IIP) followed by immediate provisionalization improves the esthetic outcome, with forest plot favoring immediate provisionalization and demonstrating a statistically significant difference (mean difference [MD] =1.54, [95% confidence interval (CI): 0.82-2.27], P < 0.0001). Statistically insignificant result was observed for secondary outcomes; bleeding on probing (MD = 4.00, [95% CI: -1.15-9.15], P = 0.13), probing depth (MD = 0.17, [95% CI: -0.13-0.48], P = 0.26), plaque index (MD = -1.00, [95% CI: -7.56-5.56], P = 0.77), mesial papillary recession (MD = -0.10, [95% CI: -0.31-0.10], P = 0.33), midfacial mucosal recession (MD = -0.47, [95% CI: -1.01-0.07], P = 0.09). However, for distal papillary recession (MD = -0.32, [95% CI: -0.50--0.13], P = 0.0007), the result was statistically significant with forest plot favoring immediate provisionalization.

Conclusion

When the implant is placed in the esthetic zone, IIP with immediate provisionalization provides the best gingival (pink) esthetics.

A systematic review and meta-analysis evaluating the survival, the failure, and the complication rates of veneered and monolithic all-ceramic implant-supported single crowns

Objective

To assess the survival, failure, and complication rates of veneered and monolithic all‐ceramic implant‐supported single crowns (SCs).

Methods

Literature search was conducted in Medline (PubMed), Embase, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials until September 2020 for randomized, prospective, and retrospective clinical trials with follow‐up time of at least 1 year, evaluating the outcome of veneered and/or monolithic all‐ceramic SCs supported by titanium dental implants. Survival and complication rates were analyzed using robust Poisson's regression models.

Results

Forty‐nine RCTs and prospective studies reporting on 57 material cohorts were included. Meta‐analysis of the included studies indicated an estimated 3‐year survival rate of veneered‐reinforced glass‐ceramic implant‐supported SCs of 97.6% (95% CI: 87.0%–99.6%). The estimated 3‐year survival rates were 97.0% (95% CI: 94.0%–98.5%) for monolithic‐reinforced glass‐ceramic implant SCs, 96.9% (95% CI: 93.4%–98.6%) for veneered densely sintered alumina SCs, 96.3% (95% CI: 93.9%–97.7%) for veneered zirconia SCs, 96.1% (95% CI: 93.4%–97.8%) for monolithic zirconia SCs and only 36.3% (95% CI: 0.04%–87.7%) for resin‐matrix‐ceramic (RMC) SCs. With the exception of RMC SCs (p < 0.0001), the differences in survival rates between the materials did not reach statistical significance. Veneered SCs showed significantly (p = 0.017) higher annual ceramic chipping rates (1.65%) compared with monolithic SCs (0.39%). The location of the SCs, anterior vs. posterior, did not influence survival and chipping rates.

Conclusions

With the exception of RMC SCs, veneered and monolithic implant‐supported ceramic SCs showed favorable short‐term survival and complication rates. Significantly higher rates for ceramic chipping, however, were reported for veneered compared with monolithic ceramic SCs.

Effect of customized healing abutments on the peri-implant linear and volumetric tissue changes at maxillary immediate implant sites: A 1-year prospective randomized clinical trial

BACKGROUND

Immediate implant placement (IIP) associated with the use of bone substitutes and collagen matrices (CM) seems to reduce the amount of resorption at peri-implant areas. Recently, customized healing abutments (CA) appeared as another solution in order to seal the socket and preserve the original soft tissue contour.

PURPOSE

To evaluate peri-implant tissues dimensional changes after using customized healing abutments compared with the use of xenogeneic collagen matrices as socket sealing options in flapless maxillary immediate implant placement.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

The present study was designed as a prospective, randomized, controlled clinical trial. Patients were allocated into two groups depending on the socket sealing option: in the CM group a collagen matrix was used and in the CA group a customized abutment. Digital impressions were taken prior to extraction, 1, 4, and 12 months after implant insertion and the digital files allowed to evaluate linear buccal changes (MBC) and the buccal volumetric variation (BVv) between the different time points at peri-implant tissue areas. Additionally, mucosa variation was computed assessing the papilla presence and the midfacial mucosa height. Statistical significance was set at 0.05.

RESULTS

Twenty-eight patients were observed during a 12-month period. Significant differences between mean values of BVv at the first month were observed at the CM and CA group (-9.75 ± 6.65% and -4.76 ± 5.29%, respectively) (p = 0.043). At the 1-year follow-up, no significant differences were found in terms of BVv between the two groups, although the thin bone phenotype (≤1 mm) significantly influenced the volumetric variations that occurred in each group. No significant differences were noticed in midfacial mucosa and papillae alteration between groups, after 1 year of treatment.

CONCLUSION

Both treatment options are predictable solutions for socket sealing in IIP, although a higher volumetric variation can be expected in the presence of thin bone phenotypes.

Ten Year Clinical and Aesthetic Outcomes of an Immediately Placed and Restored Implant in the Anterior Maxilla: A Case Report

The nature of immediate implant placement followed by an immediate restoration protocol makes it particularly suited to the anterior maxilla. In addition to saving treatment time and avoiding additional surgical procedures, this protocol has been reported to improve aesthetic outcomes by supporting the peri-implant tissues during the implant healing phase through the use of a provisional restoration. This case report documents the use of this protocol in a patient with a failing maxillary anterior tooth and reports on the soft and hard tissue changes over an observation period of 10 years. An implant was immediately placed after removal of a failing maxillary central incisor followed by the provision of a screw retained provisional crown on the same day. A definitive restoration was placed after a 3-month healing period. Not only did this protocol manage to maintain peri-implant bone levels over the 10-year follow-up period, excellent aesthetic outcomes and very limited soft tissue recession were observed with the use of this technique.

Immediate implant placement in fresh extraction sockets

Immediate implant placement (IIP) in fresh extraction sockets exhibits similar survival and success rates to delayed implant placement in healed sockets. Several advantages of IIP involve shortened total treatment time, reduction of the number of invasive surgeries, and subsequent reduction of patient discomfort due to lack of additional surgeries. The major shortcomings in IIP, however, include the inability to obtain early bony support, presence of a gap between the extraction socket and fixture, and the inability to cover the fixture with soft tissue, leading to increased risk of infection and implant loss. When IIP is performed, atraumatic or minimally traumatic extractions, conservation of the septal bone in molars, minimal flap elevation or flapless surgery, bone grafting the gap between the fixture and the extraction socket, and coverage with soft tissue or a membrane must be considered.

Immediate placement of single implants with or without immediate provisionalization in the maxillary aesthetic region: A 5-year comparative study

Aim

To compare marginal bone level changes around immediately placed and immediately provisionalized implants with immediately placed and delayed provisionalized implants in the aesthetic region after five years of function.

Materials and Methods

Forty patients with a failing tooth in the maxillary anterior region were randomly assigned immediate implant placement with immediate (Group A: n = 20) or delayed (Group B: n = 20) provisionalization. Definitive crown placement occurred three months after provisionalization. The primary outcomes were changes in marginal bone level. In addition, survival rates, buccal bone thickness, soft peri‐implant tissues, aesthetics and patient‐reported outcomes were assessed.

Results

After 5 years, the mean mesial and distal marginal bone level changes were 0.71 ± 0.68 mm and 0.71 ± 0.71 mm, respectively, in group A and 0.49 ± 0.52 mm and 0.54 ± 0.64 mm, respectively, in group B; the difference between the groups was not significant (p = .305 and p = .477, respectively). Implant and restoration survivals were 100%. No clinically relevant differences in buccal bone thickness or in mid‐facial peri‐implant mucosal level, aesthetic and patient outcomes were observed.

Conclusions

The mean marginal bone level changes following immediate implant placement and provisionalization were comparable with immediate implant placement and delayed provisionalization. (www.isrctn.com: ISRCTN57251089 and www.trialregister.nl: NL8255).

Allograft and Collagen Membrane Augmentation Procedures Preserve the Bone Level around Implants after Immediate Placement and Restoration

Background: Immediate implant placement and restoration (IPR), is a reliable treatment modality. Purpose: This historical prospective study evaluated the medium-term outcomes of hard tissue after IPR in the anterior maxilla with simultaneous hard tissue augmentation. Methods: Seventy-three patients treated with single-implant IPR in the anterior maxilla were followed for 1-8 years. Treatment involved, atraumatic extraction, immediate implant placement and abutment adaptation, followed by simultaneous augmentation with mineralized freeze-dried bone allograft (FDBA) particles to fill the gaps and restore the ridge. The surgical site was stabilized with a resorbable collagen membrane, followed by the connection of an acrylic provisional restoration. Results: All implants osseointegrated during the follow-up period (mean, 34 ± 22 months). Radiographic evaluation of the distance between the implant shoulder (IS) and crestal bone level (CBL) was of 0.86 ± 0.86 mm and 0.8 ± 0.84 mm mesially and distally, respectively. Splitting the results into up to 3 years and 3-8 years of follow-up data, the corresponding values were 0.90 ± 0.83 and 0.68 ± 0.88 for the mesial aspect and 0.99 ± 0.87and 0.74 ± 0.83 for the distal aspect, respectively. Mean peri-implant probing depth was 3.63 mm (SD ± 1.06) and 16 implants (22%) presented at least one bleeding pocket of ≥5 mm (peri implant mucositis). Conclusions: The immediate replacement of a single maxillary tooth by implants combined with guided bone regeneration is a predictable treatment modality with favorable peri-implant bony response.

On the Cleanliness of Different Oral Implant Systems: A Pilot Study

(1) Background: This paper aimed to compare the cleanliness of clinically well-documented implant systems with implants providing very similar designs. The hypothesis was that three well-established implant systems from Dentsply Implants, Straumann, and Nobel Biocare were not only produced with a higher level of surface cleanliness but also provided significantly more comprehensive published clinical documentation than their correspondent look-alike implants from Cumdente, Bioconcept, and Biodenta, which show similar geometry and surface structure. (2) Methods: Implants were analyzed using SEM imaging and energy-dispersive X-ray spectroscopy to determine the elemental composition of potential impurities. A search for clinical trials was carried out in the PubMed database and by reaching out to the corresponding manufacturer. (3) Results: In comparison to their corresponding look-alikes, all implants of the original manufacturers showed—within the scope of this analysis—a surface free of foreign materials and reliable clinical documentation, while the SEM analysis revealed significant impurities on all look-alike implants such as organic residues and unintended metal particles of iron or aluminum. Other than case reports, the look-alike implant manufacturers provided no reports of clinical documentation. (4) Conclusions: In contrast to the original implants of market-leading manufacturers, the analyzed look-alike implants showed significant impurities, underlining the need for periodic reviews of sterile packaged medical devices and their clinical documentation.

A method to evaluate the accuracy of dental implant placement without postoperative radiography after computer-guided implant surgery: A dental technique

This technique allows evaluation of the accuracy of a dental implant's position after computer-guided surgery without postoperative radiography. Once the scanned implant and scan body file were prepared, the position of the placed implant was verified by using a computer-guided implant software program instead of radiography, thus reducing radiation exposure.

Satisfaction analysis of patients with single implant treatments based on a questionnaire survey

Background: The factors influencing satisfaction of the patients with implant treatments are still unclear. This study aims to evaluate the patients' satisfaction and to identify influencing factors, which will improve the medical quality of oral implantology. Materials and methods: Patients who lost single teeth and received implant treatments were enrolled in Nanjing Stomatological Hospital between February 2016 and March 2018. A questionnaire survey was performed to assess patient satisfaction and data were collected at four time points. Information included gender, age, educational level, application of bone augmentation, type of prosthetic restoration, period of teeth loss, dentist qualification, and tooth position. Meanwhile, the satisfaction of the patients was evaluated by visual analog scale. Results: A total of 373 patients completed the questionnaires. The mean of overall satisfaction score was 69.05±7.10. Lower overall satisfaction score was found in patients who received bone augmentation (P<0.001) and those with a longer period of teeth loss (P<0.05). In the bone augmentation group, the elements of pain and complication were significantly associated with a decrease in the median satisfaction score (P<0.001), and a similar result was obtained form the duration of operative time and healing response (P<0.001). On the other hand, the satisfaction scores for elements including the duration of operative time and healing response (P<0.05), aesthetics and psychology (P<0.05), and chewing function (P<0.05) decreased with an extended period of teeth loss. Meanwhile, over half of respondents were more concerned about the survival time (40.70%) and success rate (20.49%) of implants. Conclusion: Bone augmentation and the period of teeth loss are negative factors affecting patient satisfaction, and the success rate and survival time of implants are considerable aspects for patients. It is essential to raise general awareness of oral hygiene and optimize the dental implant therapeutic process.