Alveolar ridge changes 1-year after early implant placement, with or without alveolar ridge preservation at single-implant sites in the aesthetic region: A secondary analysis of radiographic and profilometric outcomes from a randomized controlled trial
Franz Josef Strauss, Shunsuke Fukuba, Nadja Naenni, Ronald Jung, Brend Jonker, Eppo Wolvius, Justin Pijpe
{"title":"Alveolar ridge changes 1-year after early implant placement, with or without alveolar ridge preservation at single-implant sites in the aesthetic region: A secondary analysis of radiographic and profilometric outcomes from a randomized controlled trial","authors":"Franz Josef Strauss, Shunsuke Fukuba, Nadja Naenni, Ronald Jung, Brend Jonker, Eppo Wolvius, Justin Pijpe","doi":"10.1111/cid.13297","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Objectives</h3>\n \n <p>To assess both the radiographic and profilometric outcomes of early implant placement with or without alveolar ridge preservation (ARP) (using two different ARP techniques) after 1 year of loading.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Materials and Methods</h3>\n \n <p>Seventy-five patients with a failing single tooth in the anterior maxilla were randomly allocated to three groups (1:1:1): (a) ARP using demineralized bovine bone mineral containing 10% collagen (DBBM-C) covered by a collagen matrix (CM), (b) ARP using DBBM-C covered with a palatal graft (PG), and (c) unassisted socket healing (control). Eight weeks after tooth extraction, early implant placement was performed in all patients. Cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) and impressions were taken 8 weeks after tooth extraction (ARP/unassisted healing) prior to implant placement and 1-year post-loading. Radiographic and profilometric outcomes were evaluated.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Results</h3>\n \n <p>Out of the 70 patients available for re-examination at 1-year post-loading, 55 datasets could be assessed (ARP-CM 19; ARP-PG 17; Control 19). The need for additional guided bone regeneration (GBR) at implant placement amounted to 31.6% (ARP-CM), 29.4% (ARP-PG), and 68.4% (unassisted healing). Adjusted models revealed that residual buccal bone height and additional GBR at implant placement significantly influenced the magnitude of the alveolar changes at 1 year (<i>p <</i> 0.05). In patients with ARP (group ARP-CM or ARP-PG) without additional GBR, the presence of bone convexity amounted to 36.0% (9/25) at 1-year post-loading. For patients that received ARP and additional GBR at implant placement, the frequency of bone convexity increased to 72.7% (8/11) (<i>p</i> = 0.042). Regarding profilometric measurements, a tendency toward agreement with radiographic outcomes was observed.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Conclusions</h3>\n \n <p>Early implant placement with ARP can attenuate alveolar ridge changes at 1-year post loading by minimizing both radiographic and profilometric alterations. However, early implant placement with simultaneous GBR consistently yields superior radiographic and profilometric outcomes, regardless of whether ARP is performed.</p>\n </section>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":50679,"journal":{"name":"Clinical Implant Dentistry and Related Research","volume":"26 2","pages":"356-368"},"PeriodicalIF":3.7000,"publicationDate":"2023-12-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Clinical Implant Dentistry and Related Research","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/cid.13297","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Objectives
To assess both the radiographic and profilometric outcomes of early implant placement with or without alveolar ridge preservation (ARP) (using two different ARP techniques) after 1 year of loading.
Materials and Methods
Seventy-five patients with a failing single tooth in the anterior maxilla were randomly allocated to three groups (1:1:1): (a) ARP using demineralized bovine bone mineral containing 10% collagen (DBBM-C) covered by a collagen matrix (CM), (b) ARP using DBBM-C covered with a palatal graft (PG), and (c) unassisted socket healing (control). Eight weeks after tooth extraction, early implant placement was performed in all patients. Cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) and impressions were taken 8 weeks after tooth extraction (ARP/unassisted healing) prior to implant placement and 1-year post-loading. Radiographic and profilometric outcomes were evaluated.
Results
Out of the 70 patients available for re-examination at 1-year post-loading, 55 datasets could be assessed (ARP-CM 19; ARP-PG 17; Control 19). The need for additional guided bone regeneration (GBR) at implant placement amounted to 31.6% (ARP-CM), 29.4% (ARP-PG), and 68.4% (unassisted healing). Adjusted models revealed that residual buccal bone height and additional GBR at implant placement significantly influenced the magnitude of the alveolar changes at 1 year (p < 0.05). In patients with ARP (group ARP-CM or ARP-PG) without additional GBR, the presence of bone convexity amounted to 36.0% (9/25) at 1-year post-loading. For patients that received ARP and additional GBR at implant placement, the frequency of bone convexity increased to 72.7% (8/11) (p = 0.042). Regarding profilometric measurements, a tendency toward agreement with radiographic outcomes was observed.
Conclusions
Early implant placement with ARP can attenuate alveolar ridge changes at 1-year post loading by minimizing both radiographic and profilometric alterations. However, early implant placement with simultaneous GBR consistently yields superior radiographic and profilometric outcomes, regardless of whether ARP is performed.
期刊介绍:
The goal of Clinical Implant Dentistry and Related Research is to advance the scientific and technical aspects relating to dental implants and related scientific subjects. Dissemination of new and evolving information related to dental implants and the related science is the primary goal of our journal.
The range of topics covered by the journals will include but be not limited to:
New scientific developments relating to bone
Implant surfaces and their relationship to the surrounding tissues
Computer aided implant designs
Computer aided prosthetic designs
Immediate implant loading
Immediate implant placement
Materials relating to bone induction and conduction
New surgical methods relating to implant placement
New materials and methods relating to implant restorations
Methods for determining implant stability
A primary focus of the journal is publication of evidenced based articles evaluating to new dental implants, techniques and multicenter studies evaluating these treatments. In addition basic science research relating to wound healing and osseointegration will be an important focus for the journal.