Buccal bone dimensional changes at immediate implant sites in the maxillary esthetic zone within a 4–12‐month follow‐up period: A systematic review and m<scp>eta‐analysis</scp>

Mao, Zhen; Lee, Chun‐Teh; He, Si Meng; Zhang, Shu; Bao, Jibo; Xie, Zhigang

doi:10.1111/cid.13051

Cited by 19 publications

(22 citation statements)

References 48 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…47 Nevertheless, a plethora of studies using this methodologic assessment are available in the literature. 15,29,30,[32][33][34]37,38,42,48 In the current study, an implant template with the same dimensions of the implant was aligned in the imaging software.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The analyses of the buccal bone thickness on CBCT reconstructions also have some limitations due to image artifacts produced by the implant 47 . Nevertheless, a plethora of studies using this methodologic assessment are available in the literature 15,29,30,32–34,37,38,42,48 . In the current study, an implant template with the same dimensions of the implant was aligned in the imaging software.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Various factors may compensate for the bone modeling when placing immediate implants, such as thicker alveolar buccal bone wall, 10,11 larger alveolar process, 11 proper 3-dimensional implant positioning, 7,12,13 use of bone grafts, [14][15][16] and use of connective tissue grafts. 1,17,18 The distance from the implant shoulder to the bone crest (gap) at the buccal aspect is also a factor that is reported to be important to reduce bone alterations.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Effect of the buccal gap width following immediate implant placement on the buccal bone wall: A retrospective cone‐beam computed tomography analysis

Levine

Dias

Wang

et al. 2022

Clin Implant Dent Rel Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background The effect of the buccal gap width on the clinical outcome of socket graft and immediate implant placement (IIP) at maxillary central incisor sites has not been investigated. Thus, the aim of the present study was to evaluate the effect of the width of the buccal gap on the thickness of the newly formed buccal wall. Methods Forty‐two patients and 51 maxillary central incisor sites treated with IIP and ridge preservation by means of graft of the buccal gap at the maxillary central incisor region were included in the study. The width of the buccal gap was measured and filled with deproteinized bovine bone mineral. Implant sites were divided into two groups: wide gap (WG, >2 mm; n = 34) and narrow gap (NG, ≤2 mm; n = 17). After at least 1 year in function (5 ± 4), CBCT scans were obtained and assessed by a calibrated examiner. The thickness of the buccal and palatal bone walls, the percentage of the implant height covered by bone in the buccal and palatal aspects and the position of the buccal and palatal crests were compared between the two groups. A linear regression model was performed to assess predictors of the thickness of the buccal bone. Results The buccal bone was significantly thicker in the WG group than the NG group at all levels observed (overall 1.9 ± 0.9 mm and 0.5 ± 0.6 mm, respectively). The thickness of the palatal bone was similar between both groups (>2 mm). The percentage of the implant height covered by bone at the buccal aspect was significantly higher in the WG group (95 ± 16.6%) than in the NG group (59.4 ± 42.3%). The position of the buccal crest in relation to the implant shoulder was significantly more coronal (0.3 ± 2.2 mm) in the WG group than in the NG group (−4.7 ± 5.6 mm). The regression analysis model indicated that the width of the buccal gap was the only predictor of the thickness of the newly formed buccal bone wall (p < 0.001). Conclusion Grafting of >2 mm‐wide buccal gaps following IIP promoted a thicker buccal bone wall.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Effect of the buccal gap width following immediate implant placement on the buccal bone wall: A retrospective cone‐beam computed tomography analysis

Levine

Dias

Wang

et al. 2022

Clin Implant Dent Rel Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The different HTA techniques, such as gap filling, over‐contour augmentation, or socket shield technique, were not further analysed in this study. Another systematic review reported that gap filling showed 0.58 mm BBT reduction, while over‐contour augmentation showed 0.80 mm BBT reduction, without significant difference (Mao et al, 2021). However, the choice of HTA techniques was mainly based on the presence of an initial buccal bone defect, which was different among studies.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Buccal bone thickness and mid‐facial soft tissue recession after various surgical approaches for immediate implant placement: A systematic review and network meta‐analysis of controlled trials

Shi

Buti

et al. 2023

J Clinic Periodontology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Aim To evaluate the relative efficacy and confidence in the precision of the results of different surgical interventions for immediate implant placement in the anterior area. Materials and Methods Electronic searches were performed in PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane CENTRAL. Randomized controlled trials comparing different surgical techniques in anterior jaws for type 1 implant placement were included. Outcome measures included implant survival (primary outcome), buccal bone thickness (BBT) reduction, and mid‐facial soft tissue recession (MSTR). Risks of bias assessment, network meta‐analysis (NMA), sensitivity analysis, and quality‐of‐evidence assessment were performed. Results Twenty‐two studies reporting on 948 subjects and 5 surgical interventions were included. Fourteen early failures were reported. Compared with open‐flap surgery without tissue augmentation (F‐N) and looking at BBT preservation, NMA showed that there was moderate confidence that flapless surgery with hard tissue augmentation (FL‐HTA) was better than flapless surgery without tissue augmentation (FL‐N) or open‐flap surgery with hard tissue augmentation (F‐HTA) (mean difference –0.8 mm, 95% confidence interval: −1.1 to −0.5 mm; −0.6 mm, −0.9 to −0.4 mm; and −0.5 mm, −0.7 to −0.3 mm, respectively). There was moderate confidence that flapless surgery with hard and soft tissue augmentation (FL‐HTA&STA) could significantly prevent MSTR compared with FL‐HTA (−0.5 mm, −0.7 to −0.3 mm) and FL‐N (−0.6 mm, −1.2 to −0.04 mm). However, there was no significant additional benefit in BBT with the FL‐HTA&STA approach compared to the FL‐HTA approach (−0.30 mm, −0.81 to 0.21 mm). Conclusions For immediate implant placement in the anterior areas, the FL‐HTA approach better preserves BBT (moderate confidence); adding STA improves the stability of the mid‐facial soft tissue level (moderate confidence) but at the expense of BBT (low confidence).

show abstract

“…10 However, compromised post-extraction sockets have showed successful immediate implant placement when combined with soft tissue and bone grafting. 11,12…”

Section: Post-extraction Socket Typementioning

confidence: 99%

Factors affecting success and esthetic outcome of immediate implant placement. A contemporary overview.

El-Danasory

Tahamawy

Ismail

2023

Egyptian Dental Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Advances in dental implant design and surface treatment beside the growing interest in dental esthetics have made a paradigm shift in implant dentistry. Instead of focusing on achieving successful implant osseointegration, constructing highly esthetic implant restoration and shortening the total treatment time have become the area of interest. The new philosophy has supported the protocol of immediate implant placement that showed high success rates and esthetic results. However, careful case selection and meticulous prosthetic and surgical implant planning are essential. This review discussed and summarized the important factors affecting case selection and implant planning to achieve an osseointegrated immediately placed implant with satisfying esthetic outcomes. The affecting factors were categorized into patient-related and clinician-related factors. Patient-related factors were periodontal phenotype, post-extraction socket type, presence of infection, smoking and esthetic risk assessment analysis. Clinician-related factors included position and design of the implant, jumping gap dimensions, surgical technique for implant placement, and socket-sealing technique.

show abstract

Buccal bone dimensional changes at immediate implant sites in the maxillary esthetic zone within a 4–12‐month follow‐up period: A systematic review and meta‐analysis

Cited by 19 publications

References 48 publications

Effect of the buccal gap width following immediate implant placement on the buccal bone wall: A retrospective cone‐beam computed tomography analysis

Effect of the buccal gap width following immediate implant placement on the buccal bone wall: A retrospective cone‐beam computed tomography analysis

Buccal bone thickness and mid‐facial soft tissue recession after various surgical approaches for immediate implant placement: A systematic review and network meta‐analysis of controlled trials

Factors affecting success and esthetic outcome of immediate implant placement. A contemporary overview.

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About