Immediate single-tooth implants in the anterior maxilla: a 1-year case cohort study on hard and soft tissue response

Failure Rate of Dental Implants in the Esthetic Zone: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

The present systematic review and meta-analysis has systematically reviewed and analyzed dental implant failure for the implants placed in the esthetic zone. An electronic database search was performed in PubMed and ScienceDirect, including a manual search through the references using appropriate keywords and the PICO (population, intervention, control, and outcomes) format for the inclusion criteria. A total of 11 relevant articles were included. The quality of the randomized controlled trial (RCT) studies was assessed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool while the quality of non-randomized studies was assessed using the Newcastle Ottawa scale. Of the 11 articles included, 5 were RCTs, and 6 were non-randomized. The overall failure rate was found to be 2% (95% CI; 0.00-0.03%). The percentage marginal bone loss was estimated to be 1% (95% CI; 0.00 - 0.02%) and the mean and proportion pink esthetic scores were approximately 11.75 (0.43%) with 2% mid-facial soft tissue recession and the mesial and distal papillary recession was 0.02% and 0.01%, respectively. Based on this systematic review and meta-analysis, the rate of dental implant failure for implant placement in the esthetic zone was minimal. In addition, 1% proportional marginal bone loss and moderately high esthetic scores were found.

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.

Clinical outcomes of dental implants placed in fresh sockets: A five-year retrospective study

Purpose

This retrospective clinical study aimed to evaluate the implants placed in fresh sockets and investigate the effect of varied oral health conditions and treatment plan details on the clinical and radiographic outcomes.

Materials and methods

Fifty-nine participants (102 implants) were included in this study. Four variables, including mean probing depth (PD), mean marginal bone loss (MBL), pink esthetic score (PES), and patient satisfaction, were significant dependent variables, and the effects of independent variables on these four items were studied. The data were analyzed by the analysis of covariance (ANCOVA) using a statistical software.

Results

The mean follow-up period was 4.75 ± 1.74 years, and the mean MBL was 1.21 ± 0.81 mm. The survival rate was 97 %. There were significant effects of the finish line site, keratinized gingival width, and attached gingival width on PD after adjusting the factors. Also, the implant brand, plaque index, and uncemented prosthesis affected MBL significantly. In addition, significant effects of the surgeon, implant brand, and proximal contact on PES were found.

Conclusion

More PD was found around restorations with a finish line site > 1.5 mm subgingival. Sufficient attached gingiva was a more effective factor on PD than keratinized gingiva. Implants with more plaque scores showed more MBL.

Guided protocol for indirect fabrication of a custom provisional restoration prior to immediate implant surgery in the esthetic zone

BACKGROUND

Delivery of a high-quality provisional restoration at a maxillary anterior immediate implant site enhances patient-centered outcomes and promotes development of favorable hard and soft tissue architecture. The purpose of this report is to present a protocol relying upon compatible guided surgery and laboratory systems for fabrication of a custom provisional crown prior to immediate implant surgery in the esthetic zone.

METHODS AND RESULTS

A female patient, aged 33 years, presented to the Army Postgraduate Dental School, Fort Gordon, Georgia, with an unfavorable prognosis for tooth #9. The patient elected extraction with immediate implant placement. Prior to the surgery, we utilized a cone-beam computed tomography volume, stone models, implant planning software, and an implant indexing system to fabricate a custom provisional crown. Following extraction of tooth #9 and immediate implant placement, the provisional crown exhibited excellent fit and finish, requiring virtually no chairside adjustment. We noted minimal change in baseline mucosal contours throughout the healing phase.

CONCLUSION

The clinical/restorative protocol described in this report assured accurate three-dimensional implant positioning and permitted indirect fabrication of a high-quality custom provisional crown in advance of surgery. The laboratory workflow-which dental technicians/auxiliaries can master-has the potential to shorten surgery, enhance treatment outcomes, and increase patient satisfaction.

KEY POINTS

Why is this case new information? This report provides a stepwise workflow guiding indirect fabrication of a custom provisional crown prior to immediate implant placement. What are the keys to successful management of this case? The described technique requires compatible laboratory and guided surgery systems to assure that the restoration accounts for the three-dimensional position and timing of the implant. What are the primary limitations to success in this case? Dental technicians/auxiliaries can master this protocol and independently produce high-quality provisional implant restorations under supervision, potentially enhancing practice efficiency. However, practitioners should provide adequate staff training to optimize reliability and quality.

Frequency of screw-retained angulated screw channel single crown following immediate implant placement and provisionalization in the esthetic zone: A cone beam computed tomography study

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) study was to determine the frequency percentage of screw-retained crown using angulated screw channel (ASC) abutment for single immediate implant placement and provisionalization (IIPP) in the esthetic zone.

METHODS

The CBCT images of 200 patients without disease and without metal restorations in maxillary anterior teeth were evaluated. The mid-sagittal-sectional CBCT images of maxillary anterior teeth (#6-#11) were created in an implant planning software, screen-captured, and transferred to a presentation program. Template of tapered implants with diameter of 3.5 mm (for central and lateral incisors) and 4.3 mm (for central incisors and canines) and lengths of 13, 15, and 18 mm were applied to the sagittal images to identify the IIPP cases. To qualify for IIPP, the implant must engage >35% bone with at least 1 mm of surrounding bone and no perforations. The IIPP cases were further divided into straight screw channel (IIPPSSC) abutment or 25-degree angulated screw channel abutment (IIPPASC), based upon its restorability. The frequency percentages of possible IIPP, IIPPSSC, and IIPPASC were reported and compared among all maxillary anterior teeth.

RESULTS

A total of 1200 maxillary anterior teeth sagittal images from 200 patients (88 male and 112 female) with a mean age of 51.3 years (range 20-83 years) were evaluated in this study. The overall frequency percentages of IIPP, IIPPSSC, and IIPPASC possibility were 84% (74%-92%), 14% (10%-24%), and 75% (66%-87%), respectively.

CONCLUSION

Within the limitations of this CBCT study, 90% of single IIPP in the esthetic zone can be restored with screw-retained crown when utilizing ASC. In addition, the possibility of using a screw-retained restoration following IIPP increases about five times with ASC abutment compared to the SSC abutment.

Facial implant gingival level and thickness changes following maxillary anterior immediate tooth replacement with scarf-connective tissue graft: A 4-13-year retrospective study

OBJECTIVE

A scarf-shaped connective tissue graft can be placed at the facial and proximal aspect of the peri-implant soft tissue zone during immediate implant placement and provisionalization (IIPP) procedures in the esthetic zone to optimize implant esthetics without the need of flap reflection. This retrospective study evaluated soft tissue stability after scarf-connective tissue graft (S-CTG) in conjunction with IIPP procedures in the esthetic zone.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Patients who received IIPP with S-CTG with a minimum 1-year follow-up were evaluated. Mid-facial gingival level (MFGL) change and mid-facial gingival thickness (MFGT) change were measured and compared at the pre-op (T0), IIPP + S-CTG surgery (T1), follow up appointment with MFGT measurement (T2), and latest follow-up appointment (T3). Implant success rate and graft necrosis were also recorded.

RESULTS

A total of 22 IIPP and S-CTG procedures in 20 patients were evaluated in the study. After a mean follow-up of 8.2 years (3.9-13.4) (T3), all implants remained osseointegrated (22/22 [100%]), with statistically insignificant mean midfacial gingival level change of -0.19 mm (-1.5 to 0.8). Statistically significant difference in midfacial gingival thickness (MFGT) was noted (2.5 mm [1.8-3.5 mm]) after a mean follow-up time (T2) of 2.3 years (1-8.6) when compared with MFGT at baseline (1.1 mm [0.6-1.3 mm]) (T1). Necrosis of S-CTG during initial healing phase was noted in 9% (2/22) of the sites.

CONCLUSIONS

Within the confines of this study, scarf-connective tissue graft at time of immediate implant placement and provisionalization can thicken the gingiva and maintain the gingival level at the critical soft tissue zone.

CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE

Managing the soft tissue zone is as important as that of the hard tissue zone for peri-implant esthetics. Connective tissue graft is one of the methods that can enhance the final esthetic outcomes. This retrospective study has demonstrated that Scarf-CTG technique is an effective treatment modality to maintain soft tissue stability.

Immediate implants with buccal defects filled with bone from the tuberosity or a xenograft: 1-year randomized trial

The aim of this study was to compare the use of autologous bone from tuberosity (TUBER) and deproteinized bovine bone mineral (DBBM) in immediate implants with buccal bone defects. A total of 31 patients with one single tooth in the upper anterior region indicated for extraction presenting tomographic buccal bone defect were analyzed. Immediate implantation was conducted for all patients. In one group, DBBM and a collagen membrane were inserted into the buccal defect; in the other group, a small block of bone from tuberosity was used. The primary outcome was facial-palatal ridge thickness (FPT) measured in casts 1 year after function. The implant success rate was 100% in both groups. FPT changes were <0.5 mm and did not differ significantly between groups. FPT reductions in the DBBM and TUBER groups were 1% and 0.6%, respectively, at the gingival margin and 5% and 2%, respectively, at 6 mm apical of the gingival margin (p > 0.05). No significant differences were observed between groups for patient's esthetic, satisfaction, pain and quality of life. Pink esthetic scores for the DBBM and TUBER were 11.5±1.7 and 10.8±1.9, respectively (p=0.37). It can be concluded that DBBM and TUBER did not differ in terms of ridge alterations, peri-implant clinical parameters and patient-reported outcomes.

Etiology and Treatment of Peri-Implant Soft Tissue Dehiscences: A Narrative Review

Implant soft tissue dehiscences compromise not only the aesthetics of the supported restorations but implant survival in the long run. The aim of this narrative review was to briefly present the causative factors of buccal peri-implant soft tissue dehiscences (PSTDs), how these are classified, and the current therapeutic approaches. Implant malposition and the thin peri-implant phenotype are the two major determinants for the occurrence of PSTDs, but other risk factors have also been identified. The most common surgical procedure for treating PSTDs is the split-thickness coronally advanced flap combined with either a connective tissue graft or acellular dermal matrix materials. However, depending on the class and subtype of the dehiscence, the combination of surgical techniques with modifications in the restoration may further ameliorate the final result. In general, within a five-year follow-up period, most techniques lead to a satisfactory aesthetic result, although full coverage of the implant/abutment surface is not always achievable, especially in more extended lesions.

Immediate implant placement vs. early implant treatment in the esthetic area. A 1-year randomized clinical trial

OBJECTIVES

To assess the impact of implant placement and temporization timing on esthetic outcomes of single maxillary anterior implants with intact bone walls and interproximal bone.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Test group patients received an immediate implant with immediate provisional restoration and socket preservation, while patients in the control group received an early implant placement with guided bone regeneration and delayed loading. Patients were followed for 1 year after final prosthetic and pink esthetic score (PES), mid-buccal mucosal level (MBML), crestal bone changes (CBC), and peri-implant soft tissue parameters, and patient chair time was recorded.

RESULTS

Fifty patients received the intended treatment (25 test and 25 control). No implants failed. PES after 1 year was 12.8 ± 1.19 for the test group and 12.5 ± 1.36 for the control group (p = .362). MBML difference between baseline (after final crown delivery) and the 1-year follow-up was gain of 0.2 ± 1.02 mm for the test group (p = .047) and no change in the control group. CBC after 1 year were 0.1 mm ± 0.21 mm (mesial) and 0.2 mm ± 0.22 mm (distal) for the test group and 0.2 mm ± 0.25 mm (mesial) and 0.3 mm ± 0.19 mm (distal) for the control group, p = .540 (mesial) and p = .462 (distal). Test group required half the chair time (127 ± 13 min) when compared to the control group (259 ± 15 min, p < .001).

CONCLUSIONS

Within the limits of this trial, both treatment protocols resulted in excellent esthetic outcomes with PES >12 after 1-year follow-up.

Estimation of Soft and Hard Tissue Revolutionization Surrounding Dental Implant: A 2-Year Retrospective Study

A dental implant is an idyllic mode of operandi for oral rehabilitation for complete and partially edentulous patients. The success of an implant is based on the health of its surrounding tissues. Therefore, the biological and clinical aspects of implant prosthesis and their surrounding tissues must persist to be investigated. A two-year retrospective clinical-radiological study was conducted to estimate peri-implant soft and hard tissue revolutionization after the placement of implants. A clinical-radiological investigation was carried out to determine the amount of soft and hard tissue revolutionization that occurred following the implantation of 200 implants. From October 2020 to March 2021, the research was carried out in the College of Dentistry at King Khalid University in Saudi Arabia. It was decided to conduct this study using a retrospective clinical record, which involved gathering information about patients who had previously received dental implants within the previous two years. Plaque index (PI), gingival index (GI), bleeding index (BI), peri-implant probing depth (PD), and peri-implant crestal bone level were measured at baseline and three months after implant placement in adult patients ranging in age from 20 to 50 years. The results were compared to the full-mouth index (FMI). Ethical clearance and written informed consent were obtained from all the study participants. The statistical analysis was done by using Statistical Package for Social Sciences (SPSS-23.0 version) (IBM; Chicago). The present study concluded that plaque accumulation, gingival bleeding, and probing depth were increased around implants during the follow-up, but it would not affect crestal bone loss. Still, it is essential to conduct a similar study with a larger sample size and a long follow-up period to give more precise results.

Influence of different diameter reductions in the labial neck region on the stress distribution around custom-made root-analogue implants

This study was designed to investigate the influence of diameter reductions on the stress distribution around root-analogue implants via 3D finite element analysis. Four root-analogue implant models with different diameter reductions (0, 1, 2, or 3 mm), a traditional threaded implant and congruent bone models were created through reverse engineering. A 100-N force was applied parallel with and in a 45° angle to the implant axis, respectively. The stress concentration in the labial neck area around implants with 1-2 mm diameter reduction was lower than seen with no reduction. When the implant diameter was reduced by 3 mm, there were obvious stress concentrations in both implant and bone (the maximum stress was 206  and 111 MPa, respectively). In other groups, the maximum stress was 65.1 MPa in the bone and 108 MPa in the implant. Additionally, the stress concentration in the bone around the root-analogue implant when the implant diameter was reduced by 0-2 mm (maximum stress of 65.1 MPa) was obviously smaller than that around the traditional implant (maximum stress 130.4 MPa). Reducing the diameter of maxillary central incisor root-analogue implants by up to 2 mm next to the labial cortical bone could help disperse stress.

Tomographic sagittal root position in relation to maxillary anterior bone housing in a Brazilian population

Purpose

This cross-sectional study evaluated and categorized the tomographic sagittal root position (SRP) of the maxillary anterior teeth in a Brazilian population.

Materials and Methods

Cone-beam computed tomographic scans of 420 maxillary anterior teeth of 70 patients (35 men and 35 women, mean age 25.2±5.9 years) were evaluated. The SRP was classified as class I, II, III, or IV. In class I, the root is positioned against the buccal cortical plate; in class II, the root is centered in the middle of the alveolar housing; in class III, the root is positioned against the palatal cortical plate; and in class IV, at least two-thirds of the root engage both the buccal and palatal cortical plates.

Results

In total, 274 teeth (65.2%) were class I, 39 (9.3%) were class II, 3 (0.7%) were class III, and 104 (24.8%) were class IV. The frequency distribution over the teeth groups was different from the overall analysis. Important differences were found in the frequencies of classes I, II, and IV compared to other populations. Sex was not associated with the SRP classes (P=0.307). Age distribution was significantly different over the classes (P=0.004).

Conclusion

The findings of this study on the distribution of SRP classes among the Brazilian population compared to other populations demonstrate that the SRP should be analyzed on a case-by-case basis for an accurate treatment plan in the maxillary anterior area.

Radiographic and Esthetic Evaluation Following Immediate Implant Placement with or without Socket Shield and Delayed Implant Placement Following Socket Preservation in the Maxillary Esthetic Region - A Randomized Controlled Clinical Trial

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this study was assessment of the changes in soft and hard tissues in the esthetic zone of maxilla following immediate implant placement (IIP) with and without the socket shield technique (SST) and placement of implants 4 months following socket preservation (DIP) in terms of alterations in crestal bone thickness (CBT) and soft tissue changes evaluated by means of pink esthetic scores (PES) following placement of implants in the esthetic zone of maxilla.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

In the maxillary esthetic region, 75 dental implants were placed totally, with 25 implants each in the SST, IIP, and DIP groups. All participants were subjected to undergo CBCT for assessing the variations in thickness of crestal aspect of facial/buccal/labial alveolar bone (CBT). PES and PROMS (patient-related outcome measures) were assessed using VAS for pain threshold and esthetic satisfaction following implant placement and after 6th post-operative month.

RESULTS

The mean reduction in CBT showed a statistically significant difference between and within the groups, in comparison to IIP and DIP groups, which demonstrated an average reduction in CBT 0.4 ± 0.1 and 0.2 ± 0.1 at 6 months following implant placement, respectively. The SST group showed a significantly lesser reduction in CBT of 0.05 ± 0.02. However, the mean difference in PES within and among the groups showed no significant difference statistically at P < 0.05. On comparison of individual scores of PES between the groups, the results showed significant difference statistically at P < 0.001.

CONCLUSION

The SST group demonstrated minimal reduction in CBT and a superior PES at the end of 6 months compared with the IIP and DIP groups.

Peri-implant tissue changes at sites treated with alveolar ridge preservation in the aesthetic zone: Twenty-two months follow-up of a randomized clinical trial

AIM

To compare tissue changes at implant sites previously treated with two biomaterials for alveolar ridge preservation (ARP) in the aesthetic zone, 1 year after restoration.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Sixty-six participants were treated with ARP using demineralized bovine bone mineral (DBBM) or DBBM +10% of collagen (DBBM-C), both covered with a collagen matrix (CM). Dental implants were placed, and definitive crowns were installed. Silicon impressions were taken before tooth extraction (T0), 2 weeks after crown insertion (T1) and 1 year after restoration (T2). Mid-facial mucosal level change (MLC), soft tissue thickness changes (TT), and marginal bone loss (MBL) were analysed using inter-group comparisons.

RESULTS

Fifty-four participants were included in the analysis. The mid-facial level change between T0-T1 and T1-T2 showed no statistical difference between DBBM and DBBM-C. Between T0 and T1 for soft tissue thickness, DBBM performed significantly better at 3 and 5 mm below the mucosal margin. From T1 to T2, no significant differences between groups were found at any level for soft tissue thickness and MBL.

CONCLUSION

At the aesthetic zone, advanced recession from tooth extraction to crown placement can be expected at sites treated with ARP regardless of biomaterial used. However, after crown insertion, tissue stability can be predicted.

Soft tissue metric parameters, methods and aesthetic indices in implant dentistry: A critical review

OBJECTIVES

The primary objective was to provide an overview of soft tissue metric parameters, methods, and aesthetic indices in implant dentistry. The secondary objective was to describe reliability and validity of aesthetic indices.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Two independent reviewers conducted an electronic literature search in Pubmed, Web of Science, Embase, and Cochrane databases up to October 2020 to identify studies on soft tissue metric parameters, methods, and aesthetic indices. Aesthetic indices were evaluated in terms of reliability and validity. Data extraction was performed by the same reviewers.

RESULTS

Five metric parameters (papilla height, linear changes in soft tissue level, color assessment, soft tissue thickness, and profilometric soft tissue changes) registered by means of several methods (intra-oral registrations, radiographic assessments, digital analyses, and ultrasonic assessments), and 15 aesthetic indices (Papilla Index (PI), ad hoc questions scored with Visual Analogue Scales, Pink Esthetic Score (PES), Implant Crown Aesthetic Index (ICAI), Implant Aesthetic Score (IAS), Rompen Index, Subjective Esthetic Score, White Esthetic Score, Copenhagen Index, Complex Esthetic Index, Californian Dental Association Index (CDAI), Peri-Implant, and Crown Index, Functional Implant Prosthodontic Score, Implant Restoration Esthetic Index (IREI), and Mucosal Scarring Index (MSI)) could be identified. With respect to metric parameters and methods, intra-oral registrations were least accurate whereas profilometric soft tissue changes on the basis of digital surface models were most accurate. Six aesthetic indices showed good inter-rater reliability (PI, PES, ICAI, CDAI, IREI, and MSI). Good validity could only be shown for two indices (PES and CEI). Given this and on the basis of ease of use and ease of interpretation, PES qualified best for clinical research on single implants. None of the indices fulfilled the quality criteria for clinical research on multiple implants.

CONCLUSION

Many soft tissue assessment methods with varying reliability and validity have been described and used, which hampers uniform reporting in implant dentistry. Clinical investigators are advised to measure linear and profilometric soft tissue changes using digital surface models, and to use a reliable and validated aesthetic index. Currently, PES qualifies best for aesthetic evaluation of single implants. An index is to be developed to assess the aesthetic outcome of rehabilitations on multiple implants.

Immediate Implant Placement and Provisionalization in the Esthetic Zone: A 6.5-Year Follow-Up and Literature Review

The success of dental implant therapy in the esthetic zone requires not only functional osseointegration but also a satisfactory esthetic outcome. To establish harmony, balance, and continuity of gingival architecture between an implant restoration and the adjacent natural dentition is challenging. Immediate implant placement and provisionalization following tooth extraction have been documented as a predictable treatment modality, with fewer surgical interventions needed, to replace a missing tooth in the esthetic zone. This case report illustrates immediate implant placement and provisionalization to replace a failing maxillary right central incisor while maintaining optimal gingival esthetics. The maxillary right central incisor was extracted without flap elevation to minimize soft and hard tissue trauma. Immediately afterwards, the implant was installed using a surgical stent and restored with a provisional crown that had no occlusal contacts. During healing, no significant adverse effects were observed clinically or radiographically. This proposed treatment modality provided the patient with immediate esthetics, function, and comfort without any complications during a follow-up period of 6.5 years.

3D Considerations and Outcomes of Immediate Single Implant Insertion and Provisionalization at the Maxillary Esthetic Zone: A Long-Term Retrospective Follow-Up Study of Up to 18 Years

AIM

Long-term studies addressing the outcomes of single immediate implantation and provisionalization at the maxillary esthetic zone are needed. The current study aimed to assess such outcomes along a follow-up period of up to 18 years.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The current study is a continuation follow-up of our previously published up to 6-year follow-up study, dated between the years 2002-2008, performed in a private clinical practice in Tel-Aviv, Israel. A total of 15 patients (23 implants) who had been treated for single-tooth replacement at the maxillary esthetic zone since 2002, underwent clinical and radiographic follow-up evaluations. Primary outcomes included mean Marginal Bone Levels (MBL), with Bleeding on Probing (BOP), implant success rate, prosthetic and esthetic complications evaluated as secondary outcomes.

RESULTS

The implant success rate was at 100%. Bone remodeling processes were observed over the follow-up period, with 0.9 mm mean marginal bone loss observed during the first 6 years of observation, followed by -0.13 ± 0.06 mm mean loss after 6 to 18 years. The last finding suggests bone deposition, as reported by other studies (Donati et al., 2012). At the final radiographic evaluation, a mean MBL of 1.35 mm ± 0.16 was demonstrated. No differences with respect to implant type or site were found. A generalized absence of BOP and esthetic complications occurred in two cases as a result of continuous adjacent teeth eruption versus obvious implant ankylosis.

CONCLUSIONS

Adhering to careful clinical protocols and 3D bone to implant considerations while immediately placing an anterior implant, this treatment approach offers both stable and esthetically acceptable results for the replacement of missing teeth at the maxillary esthetic zone.

A 5 to 7-year case series on single angulated implants installed following papilla-sparing flap elevation

BACKGROUND

Bony concavities at the buccal aspect may cause a distortion between the implant axis and ideal prosthetic axis. Angulated implants can overcome this problem, yet long-term data are lacking. In addition, papilla-sparing incisions have been proposed to reduce tissue loss, yet aesthetic outcomes have not been published.

PURPOSE

To evaluate the 5 to 7-year outcome of single angulated implants installed following papilla-sparing flap elevation.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Patients who had been consecutively treated with a single angulated implant (Co-axis®, Southern Implants, Irene, South Africa) in the anterior maxilla were re-examined after 5 to 7 years. Available data at 1 year (T1) were compared to those obtained at 5 to 7 years (T2).

RESULTS

Twenty out of 22 treated patients (11 females, 9 males, mean age of 52) with 22 implants attended the 5 to 7-year reassessment. All implants survived and stable clinical conditions could be reached with mean marginal bone loss of 1.28 mm at T2. Papilla-sparing flap elevation resulted in Pink Esthetic Score of 9.83 at T1 and 8.23 at T2 (p = 0.072). Mucosal Scarring Index was 4.61 at T1 and 3.50 at T2 (p = 0.165). The overall appearance of scarring significantly improved over time (p = 0.032), yet 59% of the cases still demonstrated scarring at T2.c CONCLUSIONS: Within the limitations of the study, angulated implants (Co-axis®, Southern Implants) reached stable clinical conditions. Papilla-sparing incisions may not be recommended in aesthetically demanding patients due to high risk of scarring.

The peri-implant phenotype and implant esthetic complications. Contemporary overview

OBJECTIVE

To provide a contemporary and comprehensive overview of the hard and soft tissue biological structures surrounding an osseointegrated dental implant (peri-implant referred to as the peri-implant phenotype), in the context of peri-implant esthetic complications.

OVERVIEW

The individual components of the peri-implant phenotype (keratinized mucosa width, mucosal thickness, supracrestal tissue height, and the peri-implant buccal bone) have been linked to different aspects of implant esthetics, as well as health-related aspects. At the time of implant therapy, respecting the biology of the peri-implant hard and soft tissues, and anticipating their remodeling patterns can alleviate future esthetic complications.

CONCLUSIONS

While the current literature may not allow for a point-by-point evidence based-recommendation for the required amount of each peri-implant structure, bearing in mind the proposed values for the components of the peri-implant phenotype, at the time of and prior to implant therapy can lead to more predictable treatment outcomes, and the avoidance of esthetic complications.

CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE

Knowledge of hard and soft tissue components surrounding and osseointegrated dental implant, and their underlying biological remodeling process is crucial for carrying out a successful therapy and alleviating possible future esthetic challenges.

Facial Gingival Changes With and Without Socket Gap Grafting Following Single Maxillary Anterior Immediate Tooth Replacement: One-Year Results

This 1-year prospective study evaluated horizontal and vertical facial gingival tissue changes after immediate implant placement and provisionalization (IIPP) with and without bone graft in the implant-socket gap (ISG). During IIPP, 10 patients received bone graft material in the ISG (G group), while the other 10 patients did not (NG group). The implants were evaluated for implant stability quotient (ISQ), modified plaque index (mPI), modified bleeding index (mBI), marginal bone level (MBL), facial gingival level (FGL), and facial gingival profile (FGP) changes. The mean ISQ value at 9-month follow-up was statistically significantly greater than on the day of implant surgery (P &lt; .05). The mPI and mBI scores demonstrated that patients were able to maintain a good level of hygiene. There were no statistically significant differences in the mean MBL changes between the G and NG groups (P &gt; .05). There were statistically significant differences in FGL changes between the G (-0.77 mm) and NG (-1.35 mm) groups (P = .035). There were no statistically significant differences in FGP changes between the G and NG groups (P &gt; .05). However, statistically significant differences were noted in FGP change between the 3–12 and 0–12 month intervals in both groups (P &lt; .05). Within the limitations of this study, although no significant differences were noted in FGP changes between groups, G group experienced significantly less FGL changes than NG group. Bone graft material placement into ISG seems to be advantageous for tissue preservation during IIPP. However, future long-term studies, with larger sample size, are needed to validate the efficacy of such procedure

A randomized controlled study comparing guided bone regeneration with connective tissue graft to re-establish buccal convexity: One-year aesthetic and patient-reported outcomes

OBJECTIVES

To compare guided bone regeneration (GBR) with connective tissue graft (CTG) in terms of aesthetic and patient-reported outcomes (PROMs).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Patients with a single tooth gap in the anterior maxilla and horizontal alveolar defect were enrolled in a single-blind RCT. All sites had a buccopalatal bone dimension of at least 6 mm, received a single implant and were randomly allocated to the control (GBR) or test group (CTG) to re-establish buccal soft tissue convexity. Primary outcomes were Pink Esthetic Score (PES) and Mucosal Scarring Index (MSI) assessed after 1 year. Secondary outcomes included PROMs registered during the early stages of healing and after 1 year.

RESULTS

Twenty-one patients were included per group (control: 11 females, mean age 51; test: nine females, mean age 48). Although there was no significant difference in the PES between the groups (control: 10.11; test: 10.48; p = .577), the MSI was significantly lower in the test (1.10) than in the control group (2.53) (p = .017). Based on descriptive statistics, the latter demonstrated wider scars, more colour mismatch and slightly more suture marks. However, these were not considered disturbing by the patients given similar VAS on soft tissue aesthetics (control: 84; test: 87). Oedema and haematoma were rated twice as high in the control group on at least two postoperative time points, and patients took more painkillers (7.10 vs. 4.86). OHIP-14 decreased in both groups between baseline and 1-year follow-up, indicative of less discomfort in daily life. Differences in MSI and PROMs between the groups may be explained by the need of a vertical releasing incision in order to achieve sufficient access for GBR, periosteal incisions and the use of biomaterials that may induce inflammation.

CONCLUSION

GBR and CTG resulted in favourable aesthetic outcomes as assessed by professionals and patients. However, given additional vertical and periosteal incisions, GBR resulted in more scarring, postoperative discomfort and a higher need for painkillers.

A 22-Year Follow Up of Immediate Implant Placement without Bone Augmentation: A Case Series Study

PURPOSE

To retrospectively evaluate the treatment outcome of immediate implants placed in fresh extraction sockets without bone augmentation after 22 years of function.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The study group received implant therapy in 1997, including surgical placement and prosthodontic rehabilitation. The mean age of the subjects at the time of implant placement was 40 ± 5.54 years. A total of 35 subjects received 36 implants in fresh extraction sockets without bone augmentation. Definitive prostheses were placed 4 to 6 months after implant placement. Implant treatment outcomes were evaluated using clinical and radiographic parameters obtained during follow-up visits at 1, 5, 10, 15, 20, and 22 years after prosthetic loading.

RESULTS

Among the 35 treated subjects, five patients moved out of the country and could not be evaluated at the follow-up times. A total of 29 subjects were included in the study with a drop-out rate of 14.1%. Of these, one patient lost the implant during the osseointegration period before prosthodontic treatment. No other implant failure or complication during the rest of the follow-up period was reported, thus giving a cumulative survival rate of 97.2% during the 22-year follow-up. The change in marginal bone level was less than 2 mm in most subjects at the 22-year examination. The mean bone loss from baseline to 22-year follow-up was 1.61 mm, and the mean bone level at the 22-year follow-up examination was situated at 2.13 ± 0.023 mm from the implant platform, which was used as the reference point.

CONCLUSIONS

Immediate implant placement in extraction sockets exhibits excellent prognosis even when bone augmentation is not performed.

Standard vs customized healing abutments with simultaneous bone grafting for tissue changes around immediate implants. 1-year outcomes from a randomized clinical trial

BACKGROUND

Immediate implants have shown risks of esthetic complications. The hypothesis was that a customized healing abutment could improve the peri-implant tissue healing.

PURPOSE

To evaluate and compare the soft and hard tissue healing around immediate implants that received bone grafting and a customized vs a standard healing abutment.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Patients, who required tooth extraction and who received an immediate implant (with an alloplastic graft material) were randomly assigned to a customized or a standard healing abutment group. Clinical and radiographic examinations were taken at baseline, at 4 and 12 months.

RESULTS

Twenty-five patients out of 61 were excluded from the study because unsuitable for immediate implantation. In total, 36 patients were randomized in the two groups. There were 17 females and 19 males (age range 23-77). No prosthetic or implant failure was registered during the study period. The Papilla Index was significantly higher in the customized than in the standard group at 4 and 12 months (P = .0002). The bone loss at mesial sites was significantly higher in the control than in the test group (P = .0014).

CONCLUSION

The customized healing abutment group showed the most favorable outcomes (in terms of PI and MBL) in case of immediate implant that received a peri-implant bone grafting procedure.

A randomized controlled trial to compare aesthetic outcomes of immediately placed implants with and without immediate provisionalization

INTRODUCTION

There are mixed results regarding the aesthetic advantage of immediate provisionalization of dental implants. Therefore, this study aimed to compare facial mucosal level of single immediately placed implants with and without immediate provisionalization.

METHODS

Single implants were immediately placed to replace a hopeless maxillary anterior or premolar tooth in 40 subjects. Each implant was randomly assigned to receive a non-occluding temporary crown or a healing abutment after implant placement. At 4 months, these implants were permanently restored and followed up for 12 months. Clinical and radiographic parameters were measured and compared.

RESULTS

The implant survival rate at 12 months in the test and control group was 90% and 100%, respectively. Mid-facial mucosal marginal level and papilla height changes were minimal within groups, and no significant differences were found between the two groups. The amount of marginal bone remodelling was modest, with no significant difference between the two groups. Radiographic bone changes were not statistically different between the groups, except for the vertical crestal bone resorption.

CONCLUSION

Immediate implant placement with or without provisionalization can achieve stable vertical soft tissue level for 12 months as compared to pre-extraction level. However, immediate provisionalization was not able to improve the aesthetic outcome further.

Peri-implant marginal bone loss rate pre- and post-loading: An exploratory analysis of associated factors

OBJECTIVES

To perform an exploratory analysis of factors influencing annual rates of peri-implant marginal bone loss (RBL) calculated over different time frames, at implants unaffected by peri-implantitis.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

A total of 154 implants from 86 patients were reviewed at 1.6-6.8 years after placement. Marginal bone levels (MBL) were assessed on intraoral radiographs at three time-points: immediately post-placement, time of loading, and least 1-year post-loading. RBLs (mm/year) were computed using these three time frames and corresponding MBL changes as: RBL placement-loading, RBL loading-review, RBL placement-review. Exploratory ordination of three RBLs, corresponding time durations, and 17 background factors were used for visualization. Hierarchical linear mixed-effects models (MEM) with predictor selection were applied to RBL outcomes. The correlation of actual MBL with MBLs predicted by RBL placement-loading and RBL loading-review was tested.

RESULTS

Median RBL placement-loading was 0.9 mm/year (IQR = 2.02), loading-review was 0.06 mm/year (IQR = 0.16), and overall RBL placement-review was 0.21 mm/year (IQR = 0.33). Among-patient variance was highest for RBL placement-loading (SD = 0.66). Longer time predicted lower RBL in all time frames. Shorter time of loading significantly predicted lower RBL placement-review. Augmentation predicted lower RBL placement-loading, while anterior location and older age predicted lower RBLs placement-loading placement-review. Only MBL projected using RBL placement-loading significantly correlated with actual MBL.

CONCLUSIONS

Exploratory analysis indicated RBL varied with the time duration used for calculation in pre- and post-loading, and overall periods. In each period, RBL declined with increasing time. Earlier loading predicted lower overall RBL. Higher pre-loading RBL predicted worse actual bone level.

Immediate loading vs. early/conventional loading of immediately placed implants in partially edentulous patients from the patients' perspective: A systematic review

OBJECTIVES

This systematic review aimed at answering the following PICO question: In patients receiving immediate (Type 1) implant placement, how does immediate compare to early or conventional loading in terms of Patient-Reported Outcome Measures (PROMs)?

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Following search strategy development, the OVID, PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews databases were search for the relevant literature. All levels of evidence including randomized controlled trials, prospective and retrospective cohort studies, and case series of at least five patients were considered for possible inclusion. An additional manual search was performed by screening the reference lists of relevant studies and systematic reviews published up to May 2017. The intervention considered was the placement of immediate implant. Study selection and data extraction were performed independently by two reviewers.

RESULTS

The search yielded a list of 1,102 references, of which nine were included in this systematic review. The limited number of studies included and the heterogeneity of the data identified prevented the performance of a meta-analysis. Three studies, one of which was a randomized controlled trial, allowed the extraction of comparative data specific to the aim of the present systematic review. The remaining studies allowed only data extraction for one single treatment modality and were viewed as single cohort studies. Overall, irrespective of the PROMs chosen, patients' satisfaction was overall high with little difference between the two loading protocols. Moreover, studies indicated a positive impact on oral health-related quality of life following immediate implant placement and loading.

CONCLUSIONS

Within the limitations of the present systematic review, immediate implant placement and loading in single tooth edentulous space seems to be a well-accepted treatment modality from the patients' perspective and is worthy of consideration in clinical practice. However, the paucity of comparative data limits any definitive conclusions as to which loading protocol; immediate or early/conventional, should be given preference based on PROMs.

Patient-reported outcome measures focusing on aesthetics of implant- and tooth-supported fixed dental prostheses: A systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to summarize the existing evidence on patient-reported aesthetic outcome measures (PROMs) of implant-supported, relative to tooth-supported fixed dental prostheses.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

In April 2017, two reviewers independently searched the Medline (PubMed), EMBASE, and Cochrane electronic databases, focusing on studies including patient-reported aesthetic outcomes of implant- and tooth-supported fixed dental prostheses (FDPs). Human studies with a mean follow-up period of at least 1 year, a minimum of ten patients, and English, German, or French publication were included. For the comparison of subgroups, random-effects meta-regression for aggregate-level data was used.

RESULTS

The systematic search for implant-supported prostheses focusing on patient-reported outcomes identified 2,675 titles, which were screened by two independent authors. Fifty full-text articles were analyzed, and finally, 16 publications (including 19 relevant study cohorts) were included. For tooth-supported prostheses, no studies could be included. A total of 816 implant-supported reconstructions were analyzed by patients. Overall aesthetic evaluation by the patients' visual analogue scale (VAS) rating was high in implant-supported FDPs (median: 90.3; min-max: 80.0-94.0) and the surrounding mucosa (median: 84.7; min-max: 73.0-92.0). Individual restorative materials, implant neck design (i.e., tissue or bone level type implants), and the use of a fixed provisional had no effect on patients' ratings of the definitive implant-supported FDPs.

CONCLUSIONS

Aesthetics is an important patient-reported measure, which lacks in standardized methods; however, patients' satisfaction was high for implant- supported FDPs and the surrounding mucosa.

Validity of a regenerative procedure for a minor bone defect with immediate implant placement: a systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

This systematic review evaluates implant survival and the change in the width of the horizontal ridge following immediate implant placement with or without a regenerative procedure.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

An electronic search of MEDLINE, EMBASE, and the LILACS database of the Cochrane Central Register of controlled trials was performed, along with a manual search, up to April 2018. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and quasi-randomized controlled clinical trials (CCTs) with >10 subjects were eligible for this systematic review. A meta-analysis of the risk difference in implant failure between the regenerative and non-regenerative procedure groups was performed using a fixed-effect model. In addition, a meta-analysis of the change in alveolar bone width was conducted using a fixed-effect model.

RESULTS

Seven studies (six RCTs and one CCT) were included. A meta-analysis of three studies found no statistically significant risk difference in implant failure between the regenerative procedure and non-regenerative procedure groups. A meta-analysis of four studies showed that horizontal shrinkage of the alveolar ridge in the site of immediate implant placement was statistically significantly lower with the regenerative procedure than without it (<1 year follow up studies: weighted mean difference (WMD) 0.75 mm, 95% confidence interval 0.41-1.09, p < .00001; ≥1 year follow up study: WMD 1.22, 95% confidence interval 0.52-1.91, p = .00006; total: WMD 0.84 mm, 95% confidence interval 0.53-1.14, p < .00001).

CONCLUSION

Within the study limitations, immediate implant placement with a regenerative procedure showed similar implant survival and less shrinkage of the ridge width than immediate implant placement without a regenerative procedure. Due to the high risk of bias and small sample sizes of the included studies, further clinical studies are warranted to draw definitive conclusions.

Implant placement and loading protocols in partially edentulous patients: A systematic review

OBJECTIVES

To systematically review the evidence for the clinical outcome of fixed implant prostheses treated with different combinations of implant placement and loading protocols in partially edentulous patients.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

An electronic search was performed in Medline, Embase, and Central to identify studies investigating the outcome of implants subjected to immediate placement + immediate restoration/loading (Type 1A), immediate placement + early loading (Type 1B), immediate placement + conventional loading (Type 1C), early placement + immediate restoration/loading (Type 2-3A), early placement + early loading (Type 2-3B), early placement + conventional loading (Type 2-3C), late placement + immediate restoration/loading (Type 4A), late placement + early loading (Type 4B), late placement + conventional loading (Type 4C) with implant-supported fixed dental prostheses (IFDPs) in partially edentulous patients. Only human studies with at least 10 cases and a minimum follow-up time of 12 months, reporting on solid-screw-type implants with rough surfaces and an intra-osseous diameter between 3 and 6 mm, were included. A cumulative survival rate for each type of the implant placement and loading protocols was weighted by the duration of follow-up and number of implants.

RESULTS

The search provided 5,248 titles from which 2,362 abstracts and 449 full-text articles were screened. A total of 69 publications that comprised 23 comparative studies (15 randomized controlled trials, 7 controlled clinical trials) and 47 noncomparative studies (34 prospective cohort studies, 13 retrospective cohort studies) were included for analysis. Considerable heterogeneity in study design was found, and therefore, a meta-analysis of controlled studies was not possible. The weighted cumulative survival rate of each type of placement and loading protocol was 98.4% (Type 1A), 98.2% (Type 1B), 96.0% (Type 1C), 100% (Type 2-3B), 96.3% (Type 2-3C), 97.9% (Type 4A), 98.3% (Type 4B), and 97.7% (Type 4C). Type 1C, Type 2-3C, Type 4B, and Type 4C were scientifically and clinically validated (SCV). Type 1A, Type 1B, and Type 4A were clinically documented (CD), and Type 2-3A and Type 2-3B were clinically insufficiently documented (CID).

CONCLUSIONS

Evaluating outcomes in oral implantology by combining the placement and loading protocols are paramount. The selected loading protocol appears to influence the outcome of immediate implant placement.

Soft-tissue esthetic outcome of single implants: Immediate placement in fresh extraction sockets versus conventional placement in healed sockets

Background:

Immediate implant placement has advantages such as requiring fewer surgical procedures and decreased treatment time; however, unpredictable soft- and hard-tissue outcome is a problem. This study aimed to compare the soft-tissue esthetic outcome of single implants placed in fresh extraction sockets versus those placed in healed sockets.

Materials and Methods:

This cross-sectional, retrospective study was performed on 42 patients who received single implants. Twenty-two patients with a mean age of 40.14 years received immediate implants while 18 patients with a mean age of 43.40 years were subjected to conventional (delayed) implant placement. The mean follow-up time was 14.42 ± 8.37 months and 18.25 ± 7.10 months in the immediate and conventional groups, respectively. Outcome assessments included clinical and radiographic examinations. The esthetic outcome was objectively rated using the pink esthetic score (PES).

Results:

All implants fulfilled the success criteria. The mean PES was 8.54 ± 1.26 and 8.10 ± 1.65 in the immediate and conventional groups, respectively. This difference was not statistically significant (P = 0.329). The two PES parameters, namely, the facial mucosa curvature and facial mucosa level had the highest percentage of complete score.

Conclusions:

Immediate and conventional single implant treatments yielded comparable esthetic outcomes.

Peri-implant bone loss clinical and radiographic evaluation around rough neck and microthread implants: a 5-year study

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate marginal bone loss over 5 years around microthreaded implants placed in the maxillary anterior/esthetic zone and immediate restored with non-occlusal loading.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Seventy-one implants (with microthreads up to the platform-rough surface body and neck, internal connection and platform switching) were placed in healed bone in the maxillary arches of 30 men and 23 women (mean age 37.85 ± 7.09 years, range 27-60). All subjects had at least 3 mm of soft tissue to allow the establishment of adequate biologic width and to reduce bone resorption. Each patient received a provisional restoration immediately after implant placement with slight occlusal contact. Mesial and distal bone height was evaluated using digital radiography on the day following implant placement (baseline) and after 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 years. Primary stability was measured with resonance frequency analysis.

RESULTS

No implants failed, resulting in a cumulative survival rate of 100% after 3 years. Marginal bone loss from implant collar to bone crest measured at baseline (peri-implant bone defect at the fresh extraction socket) and after 5 years was 0.90 mm ± 0.26 mm. Mesial and distal site crestal bone loss ranged from 3.42 ± 1.2 mm at baseline to 3.51 ± 1.5 mm after 5 years and from 3.38 ± 0.9 mm at baseline to 3.49 ± 0.9 mm after 5 years, respectively (P = 0.086).

CONCLUSIONS

The results of this study showed limited implant crestal bone loss 0.90 mm ± 0.26 mm and 100% of implant survival rate at 5-year follow-up of immediate restored implants with rough surface neck and microthreads.

Implant placement post extraction in esthetic single tooth sites: when immediate, when early, when late?

Implant placement in post-extraction sites of single teeth in the esthetic zone has been a topic of great interest in the field of implant dentistry since 1990. Triggered by the development of guided bone regeneration, the concept of immediate implant placement became quite popular in the 1990s. In the past 12 years, however, the dental community has begun to focus increasingly on the esthetic outcomes of post-extraction implant placement and several studies indicated a significant risk for the development of mucosal recessions with immediate implants. Parallel with this, significant progress has been made in the understanding of tissue biology in terms of hard and soft tissue alterations post extraction, based on preclinical, clinical and radiological studies. This knowledge has helped better to understand the etiology of these esthetic complications with immediate implant placement. The present review first analyzes the various phases of the development of therapeutic strategies over the years for post-extraction implant placement in single tooth sites in the esthetic zone. It presents the current knowledge concerning the terminology with immediate, early and late implant placement, the risk factors for the development of esthetic complications, and the selection criteria for the various treatment options. In the second part, clinical recommendations are given, since a clinician active in this field of implant therapy can use all treatment options depending on the preoperative analysis including a 3D cone beam computed tomography. The selection criteria for all four treatment options are presented and documented with typical case reports to illustrate the current treatment approaches applied in daily practice.