Clinical outcomes following a combined vertical and horizontal alveolar ridge augmentation and two-stage implant placement using either autogenous tooth roots or autogenous bone blocks

AIM

To assess and compare the short-term clinical outcomes following a combined vertical and horizontal alveolar ridge augmentation and two-stage implant placement using either autogenous tooth roots (TR) or autogenous bone blocks (AB).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A total of n = 27 patients (TR/AB: 13/14) exhibiting n = 31 implants (TR/AB: 14/17) were available for the analysis. Each subject had been allocated to a combined vertical and horizontal alveolar ridge augmentation using either (1) healthy TR (e.g., retained wisdom teeth), or (2) monocortical AB harvested from the retromolar area (i.e. external oblique line). Clinical parameters (e.g., bleeding on probing, BOP; probing pocket depth, PD; mucosal recession, MR) were recorded after a follow-up period of 16.03 ± 4.3 months following implant placement.

RESULTS

The survival rates amounted to 100% in both groups. TR and AB grafted sites were associated with similar changes in mean BOP (8.97 ± 27.73%; 11.90 ± 18.97%), PD (0.53 ± 0.49; 0.47 ± 0.67 mm), and MR (0.03 ± 0.13; 0.0 ± 0.02 mm) values. The incidence of peri-implant mucositis and peri-implantitis at the patient level amounted to 15.38% and 0.0% in the TR-, and 28.57% and 7.14% in the AB group.

CONCLUSIONS

Both surgical procedures were associated with peri-implant tissue health and stability on the short-term.

Clinical performance of immediately placed and restored progressive-type implants in the esthetic zone: a prospective observational study

PURPOSE

To assess implant success and survival of immediately placed and restored progressive-type implants in the esthetic zone.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

A total of n = 21 patients (21 implants) had received an immediate placement of a tapered, two-part implant with a progressive thread design (PL) for a single tooth replacement in the anterior maxilla. An immediate 'non full-functional loaded' restoration was provided upon adequate primary stability on a final patient-specific abutment (one abutment-one time concept). The final restoration was provided at 12 weeks (baseline). Implant survival and success (e.g. bleeding on probing-BOP, probing pocket depth-PD, mucosal recession-MR, pink esthetic score-PES) as well as patient- reported outcomes (PROM`S) were recorded at 6 and 12 months.

RESULTS

An adequate primary implant stability (i.e. insertion torque > 35 Ncm) was obtained at all but one sites. At 12 months, implant survival (n = 20 patients) amounted to 100%. Non-significant changes to baseline were noted for mean BOP (2.5 ± 28.2%), PD (- 0.26 ± 0.73 mm), and MR (0.0 ± 0.4 mm) values. PES values amounted to 12.9 ± 1.14 and 13.2 ± 0.84 at 6 and 12 months. Technical and mechanical complications were not observed. Patients expressed an overall high satisfaction.

CONCLUSIONS

The presented immediacy protocol was associated with high survival and success rates on the short-term.