Comparative evaluation of conventional and socket-shield techniques on maxillary esthetics following immediate implant placement in fresh extraction sockets: A randomized controlled trial.

Q2 Dentistry Journal of Indian Society of Periodontology Pub Date : 2024-07-01 Epub Date: 2025-01-06 DOI:10.4103/jisp.jisp_13_24
Farhan Durrani, Aishwarya Pandey, Shweta Ahlawat, Ekta Kumari, S U Gokila Vani, Sakshi Agarwal, P G Naveen Kumar
{"title":"Comparative evaluation of conventional and socket-shield techniques on maxillary esthetics following immediate implant placement in fresh extraction sockets: A randomized controlled trial.","authors":"Farhan Durrani, Aishwarya Pandey, Shweta Ahlawat, Ekta Kumari, S U Gokila Vani, Sakshi Agarwal, P G Naveen Kumar","doi":"10.4103/jisp.jisp_13_24","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Dental implants in fresh extraction sockets of the maxillary esthetic area are technique-sensitive procedures where retaining a buccal root segment can enhance periodontium preservation and esthetics. This study aims to compare marginal bone levels and esthetic outcomes between conventional immediate implant placement and the socket-shield technique in fresh maxillary extraction sockets.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>Twenty-four patients with type 1 extraction sockets were included in this randomized trial and assigned to either conventional immediate implant placement or the socket-shield technique. Implant survival, crestal bone levels, and pink esthetic scores (PES) were evaluated at 8 months (temporary prosthesis), 12 months, and 36 months (final crowns).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>All implant-supported restorations were successful within the study's observation period. The socket-shield technique showed significantly lower marginal bone loss (e.g. 1.40 ± 0.29 mm vs. 1.70 ± 0.36 mm at 36 months; <i>P</i> = 0.040) and superior PES (e.g., 10.50 ± 0.90 vs. 9.36 ± 0.98 at 36 months; <i>P</i> = 0.008) compared to the conventional technique. However, the technique's complexity underscores the need for expertise and careful execution to optimize tissue preservation in the maxillary esthetic zone.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The socket-shield technique better preserves hard and soft tissues around implant-retained prostheses than conventional implant placement in maxillary esthetic regions. Further studies with larger sample sizes and longer follow-up are required to validate these findings.</p>","PeriodicalId":15890,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Indian Society of Periodontology","volume":"28 4","pages":"468-477"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11864334/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Indian Society of Periodontology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4103/jisp.jisp_13_24","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/1/6 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Dentistry","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Dental implants in fresh extraction sockets of the maxillary esthetic area are technique-sensitive procedures where retaining a buccal root segment can enhance periodontium preservation and esthetics. This study aims to compare marginal bone levels and esthetic outcomes between conventional immediate implant placement and the socket-shield technique in fresh maxillary extraction sockets.

Materials and methods: Twenty-four patients with type 1 extraction sockets were included in this randomized trial and assigned to either conventional immediate implant placement or the socket-shield technique. Implant survival, crestal bone levels, and pink esthetic scores (PES) were evaluated at 8 months (temporary prosthesis), 12 months, and 36 months (final crowns).

Results: All implant-supported restorations were successful within the study's observation period. The socket-shield technique showed significantly lower marginal bone loss (e.g. 1.40 ± 0.29 mm vs. 1.70 ± 0.36 mm at 36 months; P = 0.040) and superior PES (e.g., 10.50 ± 0.90 vs. 9.36 ± 0.98 at 36 months; P = 0.008) compared to the conventional technique. However, the technique's complexity underscores the need for expertise and careful execution to optimize tissue preservation in the maxillary esthetic zone.

Conclusion: The socket-shield technique better preserves hard and soft tissues around implant-retained prostheses than conventional implant placement in maxillary esthetic regions. Further studies with larger sample sizes and longer follow-up are required to validate these findings.

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
一项随机对照试验:传统技术与牙槽屏蔽技术在新鲜牙槽即刻种植后上颌美观的比较评价。
背景:在上颌美观区新鲜拔牙槽内种植牙是一种技术敏感的手术,保留颊根段可以增强牙周组织的保存和美观。本研究的目的是比较传统即刻种植技术和牙套屏蔽技术在新鲜上颌拔牙槽中的边缘骨水平和美观结果。材料和方法:24例采用1型拔牙槽位的患者被纳入这项随机试验,并被分配到传统的立即种植体放置或套膜技术。在8个月(临时假体)、12个月和36个月(最终冠)时评估种植体存活率、冠骨水平和粉红色美学评分(PES)。结果:所有种植体支持修复体在研究观察期内均成功。在36个月时,牙套-护套技术显示更低的边缘骨丢失(1.40±0.29 mm vs. 1.70±0.36 mm);P = 0.040)和优越的PES(例如,36个月时为10.50±0.90比9.36±0.98;P = 0.008)。然而,该技术的复杂性强调需要专业知识和仔细执行,以优化上颌美观区组织保存。结论:在上颌美观区,牙套屏蔽技术比传统种植技术能更好地保留种植体周围的硬软组织。进一步的研究需要更大的样本量和更长的随访时间来验证这些发现。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.70
自引率
0.00%
发文量
87
审稿时长
44 weeks
期刊介绍: The Journal of Indian Society of Periodontology publishes original scientific articles to support practice , education and research in the dental specialty of periodontology and oral implantology. Journal of Indian Society of Periodontology (JISP), is the official publication of the Society and is managed and brought out by the Editor of the society. The journal is published Bimonthly with special issues being brought out for specific occasions. The ISP had a bulletin as its publication for a large number of years and was enhanced as a Journal a few years ago
期刊最新文献
Estimation of plasma afamin levels in patients with periodontitis and Type II diabetes mellitus: A clinico-biochemical study. Evaluation and comparison of semaphorin 4D levels in saliva of periodontally healthy and Stage 1 Grade A periodontitis patients and its response to nonsurgical periodontal treatment: A clinicobiochemical interventional study. Effectiveness of binaural beats in alleviating anxiety during periodontal flap surgery: A randomized controlled trial. Elevating standards, elevating minds: The way forward for periodontal teaching in India. Evaluation of the efficacy of autogenous bone graft in combination with hydroxyapatite and beta-tricalcium phosphate in direct sinus augmentation - A clinical, radiographic, and histologic study.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1