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

Application of computer-aided design and 3D-printed template for accurate bone augmentation in the aesthetic region of anterior teeth

PURPOSE

To explore the outcomes of bone augmentation in the aesthetic zone of the anterior teeth using computer-aided design and a 3D-printed template.

METHODS

Ten patients with severe bone defects in the aesthetic zone of anterior teeth were included in the study; CT data were collected before surgery. The design of the osteotomy line in the bone defect area was determined under computer simulation. The position parameters and osteotomy line of the free bone were determined via virtual surgery. A 3D-printed template was prepared to guide the accurate placement of the bone graft. Reexamination was conducted to evaluate the position of the bone graft immediately after the operation and the resorbed capacity of the bone graft before implant restoration.

RESULTS

The position of the bone graft was consistent with the preoperative design. The amount of bone graft resorbed was within the acceptable range three months after the operation, and the effect of implant restoration was satisfactory.

CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE

Use of computer-aided design and a 3D-printed template can be an effective approach for accurate bone augmentation in the aesthetic zone of the anterior teeth.

Association between Peri-Implant Soft Tissue Health and Different Prosthetic Emergence Angles in Esthetic Areas: Digital Evaluation after 3 Years’ Function

Background: The aim of the present retrospective study was to assess peri-implant soft tissue health for implants restored with different prosthetic emergence profile angles. Methods: Patients were treated with implants supporting fixed dentures and were followed for 3 years. Buccal emergence angle (EA) measured at 3 years of follow-up visits (t1) were calculated for two different groups: Group 1 (153 implants) for restorations with angle between implant axis and prosthetic emergence angle from ≥30°, and Group 2 (67 implants) for those with angle ≤30°, respectively. Image J software was used for the measurements. Moreover, peri-implant soft tissue parameters such as pocket probing depth (PPD), plaque index (PI) and gingival index (GI) were assessed, respectively. Results: A total of 57 patients were included in the analysis and a total of 220 implants were examined. Mean (±SD) EA in Groups 1 and 2 was 46.4 ± 12.2 and 24.5 ± 4.7 degrees, respectively. After 3 years of follow-up, a PPD difference of 0.062 mm (CI_95% −0.041 mm; 0.164 mm) was calculated between the two groups and was not statistically significant (p = 0.238). Similar results were found for PI (OR = 0.78, CI_95% 0.31; 1.98, p = 0.599). Furthermore, GI scores of 2 and 3 were found for nine implants (5.9%) in Group 1, and for five implants in Group 2 (7.5%). A non-significant difference (p = 0.76) was found. Conclusions: Peri-implant soft-tissue health does not seem to be influenced by EA itself, when a proper emergence profile is provided for implant-supported reconstructions in anterior areas.