-
Journal of Clinical Periodontology Oct 2022To assess the effect of immediate provisionalization (IP) on soft tissue changes, hard tissue changes, and clinical parameters following single immediate implant... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
AIM
To assess the effect of immediate provisionalization (IP) on soft tissue changes, hard tissue changes, and clinical parameters 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 September 2021. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing IIP with IP (test) and IIP without IP (control) were included for a qualitative and quantitative analysis. The primary outcome was vertical midfacial soft tissue changes. Secondary outcomes included horizontal midfacial soft tissue changes, implant survival, mesial and distal papillary changes, Pink Esthetic Score (PES) at final follow-up, marginal bone-level changes, probing depth at final follow-up, and bleeding on probing at final follow-up.
RESULTS
Of the 8213 records, 7 RCTs reporting on 323 patients who received 323 single immediate implants (IIP + IP: 161 implants in 161 patients; IIP: 162 implants in 162 patients) were selected with a mean follow-up ranging from 12 to 60 months. Risk of bias assessment yielded some concerns for five RCTs and high risk for two RCTs. Meta-analysis on the cases with intact alveoli demonstrated 0.87 mm (95% confidence interval [CI] [0.57; 1.17], p < .001) less apical migration of the midfacial soft tissue level for IIP + IP when compared to IIP alone. Implant survival, papillary changes, marginal bone-level changes, probing depth, and bleeding on probing were not significantly affected by IP. Insufficient data were available for meta-analyses on horizontal midfacial soft tissue changes and PES.
CONCLUSIONS
IP may contribute to midfacial soft tissue stability at immediate implants. However, high-quality RCTs are needed since the strength of this conclusion is currently rated as low according to GRADE guidelines.
Topics: Dental Implantation, Endosseous; Dental Implants; Dental Implants, Single-Tooth; Esthetics, Dental; Humans; Immediate Dental Implant Loading; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 35734911
DOI: 10.1111/jcpe.13686 -
Journal of Esthetic and Restorative... Jan 2021This article describes a comprehensive step-by-step protocol for immediate implant placement and restoration in the esthetic zone. Clinical Considerations Immediate...
This article describes a comprehensive step-by-step protocol for immediate implant placement and restoration in the esthetic zone. Clinical Considerations Immediate implant placement into fresh extraction sockets and immediate restoration have become widely accepted, demonstrating long-term success rates that are comparable with traditional delayed implant protocols. However, they are technique sensitive and require proper treatment planning as well as meticulous execution to be predictable and successful in the long term. This is particularly important in the esthetic zone, where even minor aberrations and mistakes can have devastating consequences, and especially in younger patients, where esthetic and functional outcomes should remain stable for years and possibly decades to come. The eight critical steps for predictable immediate implant placement include: provisional restoration of the failing tooth and presurgical phase, atraumatic tooth extraction, initial implant osteotomy, 3D bone graft packing, guided implant placement with a surgical guide, customized abutment insertion, provisional crown relining, and placement of a connective tissue graft from tuberosity. Immediate implant protocols in the esthetic zone require thorough planning and execution in the proper sequence. Each one of the critical steps discussed in this article has its own importance and challenges, which are critically assessed based on current scientific evidence.
Topics: Crowns; Dental Implantation, Endosseous; Dental Implants; Dental Implants, Single-Tooth; Esthetics, Dental; Humans; Immediate Dental Implant Loading; Tooth Extraction; Tooth Socket; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 33522700
DOI: 10.1111/jerd.12716 -
Clinical Implant Dentistry and Related... Jun 2022To 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... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
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.
Topics: Dental Implantation, Endosseous; Dental Implants; Dental Implants, Single-Tooth; Esthetics, Dental; Humans; Immediate Dental Implant Loading; Tooth Socket
PubMed: 35313067
DOI: 10.1111/cid.13079 -
BMC Oral Health Jul 2022Implantology represents the gold standard for oral rehabilitation, unfortunately, often, despite there are no local contraindications to this type of rehabilitation,...
OBJECTIVE
Implantology represents the gold standard for oral rehabilitation, unfortunately, often, despite there are no local contraindications to this type of rehabilitation, there are uncertainties regarding the general health of our patients. Many patients nowadays take bisphosphonate drugs, often without first seeking advice from an oral surgeon or a dentist. The purpose of this review is precisely to highlight any contraindications to this type of treatment reported in the literature, in patients who take or have taken bisphosphonate drugs.
METHODS
For this study the scientific information sources were consulted using as search terms "("bisphosphonate AND "dental implant")", obtaining 312 results, these were subsequently skimmed according to the inclusion and exclusion criteria, and further evaluated their relevance to the study and the presence of requested outcomes.
RESULTS
Only 9 manuscripts (RCTs, Multicentric studies and Clinical Trials) were included in this review, as they respected the parameters of this review, they were analyzed and it was possible to draw important results from them. Surely from this study it is understood that the use of bisphosphonate drugs does not represent an absolute contraindication to implant therapy, it is evident how adequate pharmacological prophylaxis, and an adequate protocol reduce the risks regarding implant failures. Furthermore, the values of marginal bone loss over time seem, even if not statistically significant, to be better in implant rehabilitation with bisphosphonate drugs association. Only a few molecules like risedronate, or corticosteroids, or some conditions like smoking or diabetes have shown a high risk of surgical failure.
CONCLUSION
Although this study considered different studies for a total of 378 patients and at least 1687 different dental implants, showing better results in some cases for dental implant therapy in cases of bisphosphonate intake, further clinical, randomized and multicentric studies are needed, with longer follow-ups, to fully clarify this situation which often negatively affects the quality of life of our patients and places clinicians in the face of doubts.
Topics: Dental Implantation, Endosseous; Dental Implants; Dental Restoration Failure; Diphosphonates; Humans; Quality of Life
PubMed: 35843929
DOI: 10.1186/s12903-022-02330-y -
Journal of Esthetic and Restorative... Nov 2019The unavoidable extraction of teeth in the esthetic area can be overcome through different treatment modalities. Recently, immediate implants appeared as a minimally...
OBJECTIVE
The unavoidable extraction of teeth in the esthetic area can be overcome through different treatment modalities. Recently, immediate implants appeared as a minimally invasive approach to resolving these cases; however, immediate implant loading is not always possible or indicated. In these cases, an innovative approach through customized healing abutments could be used to preserve the soft tissue contour, eliminating the need for reopening surgery and the use of provisional restorations to condition the mucosal contour.
CLINICAL CONSIDERATIONS
The present cases describe a simplified chairside approach to use customized healing abutments for immediate implants placed after tooth extraction in the anterior and posterior areas in order to maintain the soft tissue contours while reducing the clinical steps until delivering the final restorations.
CONCLUSIONS
This technique seems to be effective to guide the soft tissue healing around dental implants allowing a natural emergence profile with implant-supported restorations, reducing the number of treatment steps.
CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE
The use of customized healing abutments prepares soft tissue for the prosthetic stage preserving its contours and eliminating the need for reopening surgery.
Topics: Dental Abutments; Dental Implantation, Endosseous; Dental Implants; Dental Implants, Single-Tooth; Dental Prosthesis, Implant-Supported; Humans; Immediate Dental Implant Loading; Tooth Extraction
PubMed: 31268244
DOI: 10.1111/jerd.12512 -
Dental Clinics of North America Jan 2021In the past, the only way to replace missing teeth was to have a removable appliance. However, these days, dental implants are commonly being used to replace missing... (Review)
Review
In the past, the only way to replace missing teeth was to have a removable appliance. However, these days, dental implants are commonly being used to replace missing teeth. The dental implants are improving as a result of new technological and scientific advances. Different materials have been used in the past for dental implants such as lead, stainless steel, and gold. Currently, the focus is on using Roxolid, surface-modified titanium implants, and zirconia. These materials have superior esthetic and functional characteristics for dental implants.
Topics: Dental Implants; Dental Materials; Esthetics, Dental; Humans; Materials Science; Titanium; Zirconium
PubMed: 33213717
DOI: 10.1016/j.cden.2020.09.006 -
Journal of Clinical Periodontology Feb 2021To assess the effect of connective tissue graft (CTG) in terms of vertical mid-facial soft tissue change when applied at the buccal aspect following single immediate... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
OBJECTIVES
To assess the effect of connective tissue graft (CTG) in terms of vertical mid-facial soft tissue change when applied at the buccal aspect 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 January 2020. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and non-randomized controlled studies (NRSs) comparing IIP with CTG and without CTG over a mean follow-up of at least 12 months were included for a qualitative analysis. Meta-analyses were performed on data provided by RCTs.
RESULTS
Out of 1814 records, 5 RCTs and 3 NRSs reported on 409 (IIP + CTG: 246, IIP: 163) immediately installed implants with a mean follow-up ranging from 12 to 108 months. Only 1 RCT showed low risk of bias. Meta-analysis revealed a significant difference in terms of vertical mid-facial soft tissue change between IIP + CTG and IIP pointing to 0.41 mm (95% CI [0.21; 0.61], p < .001) in favour of soft tissue grafting. This outcome was clinically relevant since the risk for ≥1 mm asymmetry in mid-facial vertical soft tissue level was 12 times (RR 12.10, 95% CI [2.57; 56.91], p = .002) lower following IIP + CTG. Soft tissue grafting also resulted in a trend towards less bleeding on probing (MD 17%, 95% CI [-35%; 1%], p = .06). Meta-analyses did not reveal significant differences in terms of pink aesthetic score, marginal bone level change and probing depth. Results were inconclusive for horizontal mid-facial soft tissue change and papilla height change. Based on GRADE guidelines, a moderate recommendation for the use of a CTG following IIP can be made.
CONCLUSION
CTG contributes to mid-facial soft tissue stability following IIP. Therefore, CTG should be considered when elevated risk for mid-facial recession is expected in the aesthetic zone (thin gingival biotype, <0.5 mm buccal bone thickness).
Topics: Connective Tissue; Dental Implantation, Endosseous; Dental Implants; Dental Implants, Single-Tooth; Esthetics, Dental; Immediate Dental Implant Loading; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 33125754
DOI: 10.1111/jcpe.13397 -
Clinical Oral Implants Research Jun 2022To assess the impact of implant placement and temporization timing on esthetic outcomes of single maxillary anterior implants with intact bone walls and interproximal... (Randomized Controlled Trial)
Randomized Controlled 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.
Topics: Dental Implants; Dental Implants, Single-Tooth; Esthetics, Dental; Humans; Immediate Dental Implant Loading; Maxilla; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 35318752
DOI: 10.1111/clr.13924 -
Journal of Clinical Periodontology Sep 2019This randomized controlled clinical trial (RCT) aimed to compare the accuracy of implant positions between static computer-assisted implant surgery (CAIS) and freehand... (Randomized Controlled Trial)
Randomized Controlled Trial
AIM
This randomized controlled clinical trial (RCT) aimed to compare the accuracy of implant positions between static computer-assisted implant surgery (CAIS) and freehand implant surgery in a single edentulous space.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
Sites with single edentulous spaces and neighbouring natural teeth were randomized into static CAIS or freehand implant surgery groups. In both groups, digital implant planning was performed using data from cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) and surface scans. In the static CAIS group, a surgical guide was produced and used for fully guided implant surgery, while in the freehand group, the implants were placed in a freehand manner. Postoperative CBCT was used for nine measurements representing the deviations in angles, implant shoulders and apexes between planned and actual implant positions.
RESULTS
Fifty-two patients received 60 single implants. The median (IQR) deviations in angles, shoulders and apexes were 2.8 (2.6)°, 0.9 (0.8) mm and 1.2 (0.9) mm, respectively, in the static CAIS group, and 7.0 (7.0)°, 1.3 (0.7) mm and 2.2 (1.2) mm, respectively, in the freehand group. Statistically significant differences were found in 6 out of nine measured parameters using Mann-Whitney U test (p < 0.05).
CONCLUSION
Static CAIS provided more accuracy in implant positions than freehand placement in a single edentulous space.
Topics: Computer-Aided Design; Cone-Beam Computed Tomography; Dental Implantation, Endosseous; Dental Implants; Dental Implants, Single-Tooth; Humans; Imaging, Three-Dimensional; Mouth, Edentulous; Patient Care Planning; Surgery, Computer-Assisted
PubMed: 31241782
DOI: 10.1111/jcpe.13160 -
Compendium of Continuing Education in... 2020Achieving predictable outcomes in implant dentistry requires not only an understanding of surgical and prosthetic protocols but also knowledge of bone biology. Regarding... (Review)
Review
Achieving predictable outcomes in implant dentistry requires not only an understanding of surgical and prosthetic protocols but also knowledge of bone biology. Regarding implant stability, a distinction exists between non-osseointegrated and osseointegrated implants. Primary or mechanical stability at implant placement is different than secondary or biological stability. Bone quality, implant length, and implant width all influence the achievement of primary stability. This article reviews the contemporary literature on dental implant osseointegration, with the intent of presenting clinicians scientific information concerning the biomechanical parameters and limitations of endosseous implants and their components during the osseointegration phase, as well as their behavior once occlusal forces are present following osseointegration.
Topics: Dental Implantation, Endosseous; Dental Implants; Dental Prosthesis Design; Osseointegration
PubMed: 32687377
DOI: No ID Found