Effectiveness and clinical performance of early implant placement for the replacement of single teeth in anterior areas: A systematic review

Flapless early implant placement into the uncalcified provisional matrix-Does it lead to osseointegration of the implant? A preclinical study

AIM

To test whether early implant placement into the extraction socket containing an uncalcified provisional matrix leads to successful osseointegration and stable marginal bone levels.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

In six mongrel dogs, the mandibular molars were extracted. Three weeks later, early implant placement was performed according to three experimental protocols: (i) flapless implant placement with preservation of the provisional matrix; (ii) flap elevation, socket debridement and implant placement; and (iii) flap elevation, socket debridement, implant placement and guided bone regeneration (GBR). One untreated extraction socket served as a control group. Data analyses were based on histologic slides 3 months after implant placement.

RESULTS

There were no differences in bone-to-implant contact between the three experimental groups (66.97%, 58.89% and 60.89%, respectively) (inter-group comparison p = .42). Marginal bone levels, first bone-to-implant contact as well as the thickness of the connective tissue did not reveal any significant differences between the groups (p = .85, .60 and .65, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

Flapless early implant placement into posterior extraction sockets was as effective as an open flap approach in conjunction with GBR. Mineralization of the socket seems to occur irrespective of the presence of dental implants or biomaterials.

The fusion of keratinized epithelium, an indication of early implant placement in the aesthetic area: an animal study

BACKGROUND

In the period of the early implant placement, the socket is mainly occupied by provisional matrix (PM). Keratinized epithelium (KE) is critical for primary wound closure. Although both KE and PM are important, the detailed relationship among migrating KE, PM formation and indication of the early implant placement is still unclear.

OBJECTIVE

This research aimed to locate a healing stage of KE with highest osteogenic PM formation after tooth extraction, which could be treated as the optimal time point for early implant placement.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Mice were sacrificed on days 1, 2, 3, 4 and 6 after incisor extraction. Clinical, histological, and immunohistochemical evaluations of the extraction sockets were performed, and statistical analyses were conducted. We then inserted implants into the PM with the greatest bioactivity and observed its osseointegration pattern for 3, 10, 17 and 30 days.

RESULT

When KE fusion was reached, sockets were dominated by PM with the greatest expression of osteocalcin (OC, P < 0.05) and high levels of CD34 and Runx2. OC and Runx2 expression were positively correlated with KE coverage (P < 0.05). When the implant was inserted at 4 days' healing, the PM maintained its osteogenic ability, and osseointegration proceeded perfectly.

CONCLUSION

The migration of KE was correlated with the formation of highly osteogenic and angiogenic PM. And the fusion of KE could be treated as an indication for early implant placement.

Application of orthodontics combined with porcelain laminate veneers in the aesthetic restoration and flora regulation of anterior teeth

To evaluate the effectiveness of orthodontics in combination with porcelain laminate veneers (PLV) in the aesthetic restoration and flora regulation of anterior teeth. A retrospective analysis of 336 patients who underwent aesthetic restoration of anterior teeth in our hospital from April 2019 to September 2022 was performed and divided into a control group (n = 168) and an observation group (n = 168) according to the restorative modality. The restorative modality in the control group was conventional restorative remediation, while the restorative modality in the observation group was orthodontic combined with PLV treatment. To evaluate the excellent rate of aesthetic restoration of anterior teeth in the 2 groups, and compare the color, shape, degree of translucency, edge aesthetic score, complications and satisfaction rate of restoration of anterior teeth in the 2 groups before and after restoration. The observation group had a significantly higher rate of excellent aesthetic restorations (95.23%) compared to the control group (80.95%) (P < .001). The scores of anterior tooth color, morphology, degree of translucency and marginal aesthetics were improved in both groups after restoration compared to before restoration, and the scores were significantly higher in the observation group (P < .05). After restoration, the subgingival Digestive streptococcus, Campylobacter and Propionibacterium increased in both groups, but the number of bacterial strains was significantly less in the observation group (P < .05). Compared with the total complication rate in the control group (16.66%), the total complication rate in the observation group (2.38%) was significantly lower (P < .001). Compared with the control group (85.71%), the observation group had a significantly higher restoration satisfaction rate of 97.61%, with a statistically significant difference (P < .001). The application of orthodontics combined with PLV in the aesthetic restoration of anterior teeth has a significant clinical effect, which is conducive to improving the aesthetic restoration and satisfaction rate of anterior teeth, reducing the subgingival microbial imbalance and decreasing the incidence of complications.

Alveolar ridge preservation: Complications and cost-effectiveness

Alveolar ridge preservation is routinely indicated in clinical practice with the purpose of attenuating postextraction ridge atrophy. Over the past two decades numerous clinical studies and reviews on this topic have populated the literature. In recent years the focus has primarily been on analyzing efficacy outcomes pertaining to postextraction dimensional changes, whereas other relevant facets of alveolar ridge preservation therapy have remained unexplored. With this premise, we carried out a comprehensive evidence-based assessment of the complications associated with different modalities of alveolar ridge preservation and modeled the cost-effectiveness of different therapeutic modalities as a function of changes in ridge width and height. We conclude that, among allogeneic and xenogeneic bone graft materials, increased expenditure does not translate into increased effectiveness of alveolar ridge preservation therapy. On the other hand, a significant association between expenditure on a barrier membrane and reduced horizontal and vertical ridge resorption was observed, though only to a certain degree, beyond which the return on investment was significantly diminished.

Surgical interventions for implant placement in the anterior maxilla: A systematic scoping review with evidence mapping

OBJECTIVES

Simplification and standardization of interventions are critical challenges to improving performance in implant dentistry. This study aimed to systematically identify and schematically present the evidence base of the implant dentistry surgical interventions for the anterior maxilla as a basis for further development and standardization.

METHODS

Electronic searches were conducted in PubMed, Embase and Cochrane CENTRAL. Primary clinical studies reporting surgical interventions in the anterior maxilla, with a sample size of at least ten patients, were included. Bibliometric information and study details were extracted. Descriptive analysis and a mind map approach were used to describe the documentation of different surgical interventions.

RESULTS

Two hundred and seventy-two studies reporting on 9001 patients were included. Within the past two decades, the number of literatures on implant placement in the anterior maxilla has increased dramatically (7 studies before 2005, 151 studies after 2016). Overall, the evidence map identified six primary operations and 33 variations. For hopeless tooth extraction, immediate implant placement was the most frequently reported (141 studies, 4670 patients); flapless implant placement with hard tissue augmentation and immediate provisionalization was the most commonly reported variation (33 studies, 987 patients). Type 3/4 implant placement (62 studies, 1902 patients) and implant site augmentation (33 studies, 788 patients) were frequently reported for missing teeth. Geographical differences were observed, with type 2 placement studies almost exclusively from Europe.

CONCLUSIONS

Research on immediate implant placement was the most reported surgical intervention in the anterior maxilla. Hard tissue augmentation was frequently reported simultaneously with or before implant placement. Immediate provisionalization was mainly used for type 1 implant placement. The finding that six primary operations with 33 variations have been reported indicates the need for additional research to simplify and consolidate the surgical approach.

Immediate implant placement utilizing vestibular socket therapy versus early implant placement with contour augmentation for rehabilitation of compromised extraction sockets in the esthetic zone: A randomized controlled clinical trial

OBJECTIVE

The present randomized controlled trial compares for the first time the vestibular socket therapy (VST) to the contour augmentation technique in the management of compromised fresh extraction sockets in the maxillary esthetic zone, regarding mid-facial soft tissue changes (primary outcome), mesial and distal papillae dimensions, horizontal soft tissue changes and labial bone plate thickness at apical, middle and coronal levels (secondary outcomes) over 1-year.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Forty participants with single nonrestorable maxillary teeth in the esthetic zone were randomized into two groups; VST (test; n = 20) utilizing vestibular access for guided bone regeneration (GBR) with immediate implant placement, or contour augmentation (control; n = 20) undergoing an initial healing period followed by implant placement with GBR through a conventional access flap.

RESULTS

All implants were successfully osseo-integrated, except for one implant in the test group. VST showed significantly less mid-facial soft tissue changes of -0.53 ± 1.17 mm versus -1.87 ± 0.69 mm in the control group (p < 0.001). Similarly, changes in mesial papilla (test = -0.64 ± 0.95 mm, control = -1.20 ± 0.81 mm), distal papilla (test = -0.56 ± 1.17 mm, control = -1.26 ± 0.63 mm), horizontal soft-tissue (test = -0.82 ± 0.95 mm, control = -1.84 ± 0.88 mm; p < 0.05) were significantly less in VST. Intra-group comparisons demonstrated a significant increase in labial bone thickness, with no differences between groups. Regression analysis revealed a significant correlation between VST as well as increased coronal bone thickness with the reduction in mid-facial soft-tissue changes.

CONCLUSION

The VST showed less soft-tissue changes and could represent an innovative technique for implant placement in the maxillary esthetic zone. Both techniques showed a high implant survival rate and increased bone thickness after 12 months.

Prognosis of Implants with Implant-Supported Fixed Dental Prostheses in the Elderly Population: A Retrospective Study with a 5- to 10-Year Follow-Up

This retrospective study aimed to investigate the survival rate of implants from 5 to 10 years after the placement of implant-supported fixed dental prostheses (ISFDPs) and the management of implant loss in the elderly population. Elderly patients (≥65 years old) who had been treated with ISFDPs and followed up with for at least 5 years between October 2009 and March 2020 were enrolled. Patient profiles and implant-related data were extracted. The survival rate of implants up to 5 years as well as the 10-year cumulative survival rate were evaluated. The management of implant loss and prosthetic interventions were also investigated. In total, 195 patients (mean age: 70.1 ± 4.5 years old) and 687 implants (287 ISFDPs) were assessed. The 5-year survival rate was 99.0% and the 10-year cumulative survival rate was 98.1%. Seven of the eleven implants lost were lost due to peri-implantitis. Only three implants in two patients were placed after the loss of the implants; most were restored using non-invasive procedures. Two patients underwent a conversion from ISFDPs to removable prostheses. This study showed that high survival rates were observed in an elderly population with ISFDPs and that non-invasive procedures were often applied after the loss of an implant.

Management and sequelae of dental implant removal

Inappropriate and unnecessary implant therapy driven by an erroneous belief that dental implants provide enhanced function and esthetics over diseased or failing teeth has led to a growing burden of implant complications across the globe. Specifically, esthetic and biological complications frequently lead to the unfavorable prognosis of dental implants. Often, these cannot be managed predictably to improve the condition or satisfy patients' demands. In such circumstances, implant removal needs to be considered. Currently, minimally invasive methods based on reverse torque engineering are key to preserve peri-implant soft and hard tissues. Implant replacement is now feasible, as evidenced by the high survival rates of implants placed at previously failed sites. Notwithstanding these data, clinicians should still consider carefully the expendability of an implant and whether its replacement will satisfy the prosthetic, biomechanical, and esthetic demands of the patient. In the scenario where future implant placement is desired, protocols undertaken for soft/hard tissue grafting and implant placement should be based upon defect morphology and soft and hard-tissue characteristics. Currently, however, a lack of knowledge of the biological events and dimensional changes that arise following implant removal renders decision-making complex and challenging, and recommendations remain largely based upon empirical speculation. This chapter will review the indications for implant replacement for prosthetic, biomechanical, and esthetic complications, alongside considerations in decision-making, planning, implementation, and outcomes of implant replacement.

Impact of rehabilitation versus edentulism on systemic health and quality of life in patients affected by periodontitis: A systematic review and meta-analysis

AIM

To investigate the effect of rehabilitation in fully/partially edentulous patients with stage IV periodontitis on oral-health-related quality of life (OHRQoL) and systemic health.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A systematic electronic and manual search was conducted. Three authors independently reviewed, selected, and extracted the data. Outcomes were OHRQoL (Oral Health Impact Profile 14 [OHIP-14] and OHIP-49, General Oral Health Assessment Index [GOHAI], visual analogue scale, symptoms registration) and systemic health-related outcomes (incidence and prevalence of systemic diseases, values of systemic disease indicators). Qualitative data were synthesized for OHRQoL and systemic health-related outcomes. Meta-analysis was conducted on available quantitative data.

RESULTS

The search identified 59 articles (6724 subjects in total). OHRQoL improved across all the studies, irrespective of the number of missing teeth, their location, or treatment modality. Meta-analysis showed significant improvement of OHIP-49 (36.86, p < .01) in manuscripts including subjects affected by periodontitis, consistently with the remaining literature (reduction of score points post rehabilitation: OHIP-14 = 10.52, OHIP-49 = 56.02, GOHAI = 5.40, p < .01 for all). Non-rehabilitated subjects exhibited inferior cognitive status, higher medication intake, and frailty. However, our data are limited and should be interpreted with caution.

CONCLUSIONS

Oral rehabilitation improves OHRQoL and, potentially, systemic health in edentulous patients. It is unclear whether these findings may be extrapolated to patients with stage IV periodontitis.

Evidence and risk indicators of non-random sampling in clinical trials in implant dentistry: A systematic appraisal

Aim

Analysis of distribution of p‐values of continuous differences between test and controls after randomization provides evidence of unintentional error, non‐random sampling, or data fabrication in randomized controlled trials (RCTs). We assessed evidence of highly unusual distributions of baseline characteristics of subjects enrolled in clinical trials in implant dentistry.

Materials and methods

RCTs published between 2005 and 2020 were systematically searched in Pubmed, Embase, and Cochrane databases. Baseline patient data were extracted from full text articles by two independent assessors. The hypothesis of non‐random sampling was tested by comparing the expected and the observed distribution of the p‐values of differences between test and controls after randomization.

Results

One‐thousand five‐hundred and thirty‐eight unique RCTs were identified, of which 409 (26.6%) did not report baseline characteristics of the population, and 671 (43.6%) reported data in forms other than mean and standard deviation and could not be used to assess their random sampling. Four‐hundred and fifty‐eight trials with 1449 baseline variables in the form of mean and standard deviation were assessed. The study observed an over‐representation of very small p‐values [<.001, 1.38%, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.85–2.12 compared to the expected 0.10%, 95% CI 0.00–0.26]. No evidence of over‐representation of larger p‐values was observed. Unusual distributions were present in 2.38% of RCTs and more frequent in non‐registered trials, in studies supported by non‐industry funding, and in multi‐centre RCTs.

Conclusions

The inability to assess random sampling due to insufficient reporting in 26.6% of trials requires attention. In trials reporting suitable baseline data, unusual distributions were uncommon, and no evidence of data fabrication was detected, but there was evidence of non‐random sampling. Continued efforts are necessary to ensure high integrity and trust in the evidence base of the field.

Early implant placement with or without alveolar ridge preservation in single tooth gaps renders similar esthetic, clinical and patient-reported outcome measures: One-year results of a randomized clinical trial

Objectives

To test whether early implant placement with alveolar ridge preservation (ARP) results in different esthetic, clinical and patient‐reported outcome measures (PROMs) compared with early implant placement without ARP.

Material and methods

Seventy‐five patients requiring single tooth extraction in the anterior maxilla were recruited. Following tooth extraction, the patients were randomly allocated to three groups: (a) ARP using demineralized bovine bone mineral containing 10% collagen (DBBM‐C) covered by a collagen matrix (CM) (n = 25), (b) ARP using DBBM‐C covered with a palatal graft (PG) (n = 25) and (c) spontaneous healing (control) (n = 25). Eight weeks after tooth extraction, a CBCT was taken and early implant placement was performed in all patients. Esthetic, clinical and PROMs were evaluated one year post‐loading.

Results

A total of 70 patients were available for re‐examination at one year post‐loading. The median mid‐facial mucosal margin change amounted to −0.02 mm (IQR −0.27–0.46) in the CM group, −0.13 mm (IQR −0.44–0.25) in the PG group and −0.14 mm (IQR −0.29–0.07) in the control group, with no significant differences between the groups. Mean PES scores amounted to 7.0 ± 1.4 in the CM group, 7.1 ± 1.5 in the PG group and 7.3 ± 1.7 in the control group without significant differences between the groups. Plaque, bleeding on probing and probing depth did not differ between treatment groups. PROMs in general revealed no significant differences between the groups.

Conclusion

Early implant placement with ARP using either a collagen matrix or a palatal graft rendered similar esthetic, clinical and PROMs to early implant placement without ARP. When a failing tooth can be replaced with an implant within 2 months after tooth extraction, the added value of ARP might be clinically negligible.

A case series of profilometric changes in two implant placement protocols at periodontally compromised non-molar sites

Information regarding profilometric changes at a soft tissue level following implant placement with different protocols is insufficient. Therefore, this study aimed to comparatively investigate the profilometric tissue changes with respect to late implant placement following alveolar ridge preservation (LP/ARP) and early implantation (EP) in periodontally compromised non-molar extraction sites. Sixteen patients were randomly assigned to the following groups: implant placement 4 months post-ARP (group LP/ARP) and tooth extraction and implant placement 4–8 weeks post-extraction (group EP). Dental impressions were obtained immediately after final prosthesis insertion and at 3, 6, and 12 months. At the time of implant placement, bone augmentation was performed in the majority of the patients. Profilometric changes of the tissue contour were minimal between the final prosthesis insertion and 12 months in the mid-facial area (0.04–0.35 mm in group LP/ARP, 0.04–0.19 mm in group EP). The overall tissue volume increased in both groups (1.70 mm³ in group LP/ARP, 0.96 mm³ in group EP). In conclusion, LP/ARP and EP led to similar stability of the peri-implant tissue contour between the final prosthesis insertion and at 12 months. Moreover, the change of peri-implant tissue on the soft tissue level was minimal in both modalities.

Management of the extraction socket and timing of implant placement: Consensus report and clinical recommendations of group 3 of the XV European Workshop in Periodontology

BACKGROUND

The transition from a tooth requiring extraction to its replacement (with a dental implant) requires a series of clinical decisions related to timing, approach, materials, cost-effectiveness and the assessment of potential harm and patient preference. This workshop focused on the formulation of evidence-based consensus statements and clinical recommendations.

METHODS

Four systematic reviews covering the areas of alveolar ridge preservation/bone grafting, immediate early and delayed implant placement and alveolar bone augmentation at the time of implant placement in a healed ridge formed the basis of the deliberations. The level of evidence supporting each consensus statement and its strength was described using a modification of the GRADE tool.

RESULTS

The evidence base for each of the relevant topics was assessed and summarized in 23 consensus statements and 12 specific clinical recommendations. The group emphasized that the evidence base mostly relates to single tooth extraction/replacement; hence, external validity/applicability to multiple extractions requires careful consideration. The group identified six considerations that should assist clinicians in clinical decision-making: presence of infection, inability to achieve primary stability in the restoratively driven position, presence of a damaged alveolus, periodontal phenotype, aesthetic demands and systemic conditions.

CONCLUSIONS

A substantial and expanding evidence base is available to assist clinicians with clinical decision-making related to the transition from a tooth requiring extraction to its replacement with a dental implant. More high-quality research is needed for the development of evidence-based clinical guidelines.