Esthetic evaluation of natural teeth in anterior maxilla using the pink and white esthetic scores

Chen, Jiang; Chiang, Chaoyou; Zhang, Yuqing

doi:10.1111/cid.12631

Cited by 15 publications

(16 citation statements)

References 41 publications

(100 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Any complications reported by the authors of the original article were included under the overall complications as efficacy outcome. Peri‐implant soft‐tissue esthetics was assessed clinically through the pink esthetic score (PES), 21 The PES ranges from 0 to 14 points, with the minimum clinically acceptable value ≥8 points 22,23 . Vertical bone resorption outcome was stratified into vertical buccal and vertical interproximal bone resorption.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Peri‐implant soft‐tissue esthetics was assessed clinically through the pink esthetic score (PES), 21 The PES ranges from 0 to 14 points, with the minimum clinically acceptable value ≥8 points. 22 , 23 Vertical bone resorption outcome was stratified into vertical buccal and vertical interproximal bone resorption. Horizontal bone resorption outcome was stratified into horizontal buccal and overall horizontal bone resorption.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Efficacy of bone‐substitute materials use in immediate dental implant placement: A systematic review and meta‐analysis

Zaki

Yusuf

Elkhadem

et al. 2021

Clin Implant Dent Rel Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective To assess the efficacy of using a bone substitute material (BSM) in the fixture–socket gap in patients undergoing tooth extraction and immediate implant placement. Materials and methods MEDLINE, EMBASE, and CENTRAL databases were searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs). RCTs were screened for eligibility, and data were extracted by two authors independently. Risk of bias (ROB) was assessed using Cochrane's ROB tool 2.0. Primary outcomes were implant failure, overall complications, and soft‐tissue esthetics. Secondary outcomes were vertical buccal bone resorption, vertical interproximal bone resorption, horizontal buccal bone resorption, and mid‐buccal mucosal recession. Meta‐analysis was performed using random‐effects model with generic inverse variance weighing. GRADE was used to grade the certainty of the evidence. Results After screening 19 544 potentially eligible references, 20 RCTs were included in this review, with a total of 848 patients (916 sites). Most included RCTs were deemed of some concerns (53%) or at low (38%) risk of bias, except for overall complications (high ROB). Implant failure did not differ significantly RR = 0.92 (confidence intervals [CI] 0.34 to 2.46) between using a BSM compared with not using a BSM (NoBSM). BSM use resulted in less horizontal buccal bone resorption (MD = −0.52 mm [95% CI −0.74 to −0.30]), a higher esthetic score (MD = 1.49 [95% CI 0.46 to 2.53]), but also more complications (RR = 3.50 [95% CI 1.11 to 11.1] compared with NoBSM. Too few trials compared types of BSMs against each other to allow for pooled analyses. The certainty of the evidence was considered moderate for all outcomes except implant failure (low), overall complications (very low), and vertical interproximal bone resorption (very low). Conclusion BSM use during immediate implant placement reduces horizontal buccal bone resorption and improves the periimplant soft‐tissue esthetics. Although BSM use increases the risk of predominantly minor complications.

show abstract

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Efficacy of bone‐substitute materials use in immediate dental implant placement: A systematic review and meta‐analysis

Zaki

Yusuf

Elkhadem

et al. 2021

Clin Implant Dent Rel Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Hence, soft tissue esthetic outcomes are of vital importance for achieving clinical esthetic success. The PES is an objective system for evaluating peri-implant soft tissues [15,41]. The system is based on seven variables-namely, mesial and distal papilla, the level of soft tissue margin, the contour, color, and texture of the soft tissue,as well as the alveolar process deficiency.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Socket shield technique: A systemic review and meta-analysis

et al. 2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The aim of the present study was to evaluate the clinical feasibility of the socket shield technique (SST). Study selection: An electronic search of the PubMed, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and Wiley Online Library databases, and a manual reference search for articles published up to September 2020 was conducted. Meta-analysis was performed to estimate marginal bone loss (MBL), changes in buccal bone width (cBBW), pink esthetic score (PES), implant stability quotient (ISQ), implant failure rate, and complication rate between SST and conventional immediate implant placement (IIP). All pooled analyses were based on random effects models. Results: Sixteen relevant studies were ultimately selected by two independent reviewers: four randomized clinical trials (RCTs), four case-control studies, and eight retrospective studies. Meta-analysis revealed a trend toward lower MBL and cBBW and higher PES in the SST group. ISQ, implant failure rate, and complication rate were similar between the groups. Conclusions: The included studies provided evidence that SST may be a feasible treatment option. However, this technique should not be used as a routine clinical protocol due to the lack of evidence-based consensus guidelines, large-scale RCTs, and long-term follow-up data. Therefore, there is an urgent need for well-conducted RCTs in this field.

show abstract

“…This findings were similar to Loguercio et al (2015) (12) , as they reported no statistical significant difference in sensitivity between these two isolation methods after 1 week. This sensitivity may be as a result of gingival laceration, Pink esthetic score (PES) was found to be a suitable tool for reproducible evaluation of soft tissue around tooth structure Chen et al (2018) (5) and Fürhauser et al (2005) (8) . Analysis of PES regarding mesial papilla, distal papilla and alveolar process showed that both intervention groups scored 2 at each evaluation time.…”

Section: Loguercio Et Al (2015)mentioning

confidence: 99%

Assessment of Technique Sensitivity and Gingival Health in Management of Cervical Lesions Performed Using Subgingival Clamp Versus Retraction Cord: A Randomized Controlled Clinical Trial

Eldin

Shaalan

Ibrahim

2021

Egyptian Dental Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Aim: the current study was conducted to compare technique sensitivity and gingival health of carious and non-carious cervical lesions performed using subgingival clamps and retraction cords.Methodology: 24 teeth with carious or non-carious cervical lesions were divided randomly into 2 groups receiving one of the two gingival retraction techniques, either subgingival clamp (KSK clamp #44) or retraction cord (Ultrapak E), technique sensitivity was evaluated at baseline (before application) and immediately after application while gingival health was evaluated before and immediately after application, 2 weeks, 1 and 4 months. Statistical analysis was done using t-test, Chi-square test, Kruskal-Wallis test and Mann-Whitney test where significance level was set at P ≤ 0.05.Results: There was a statistical significant difference between retraction cord and subgingival clamp regarding time of application and gingival laceration, where retraction cord took longer application time (p=0.01) and subgingival clamp showed higher laceration frequency (P=0.033). Regarding patient satisfaction, isolation from crevicular fluids, need for local anesthesia, pink esthetic score, gingival bleeding and sensitivity, there was no statistical significant difference between both groups. Conclusion:Technique sensitivity and long term gingival health were the same for both groups except that subgingival clamp provided minimal chairside time and care should be taken upon clamp application to avoid gingival laceration.

show abstract

Esthetic evaluation of natural teeth in anterior maxilla using the pink and white esthetic scores

Cited by 15 publications

References 41 publications

Efficacy of bone‐substitute materials use in immediate dental implant placement: A systematic review and meta‐analysis

Efficacy of bone‐substitute materials use in immediate dental implant placement: A systematic review and meta‐analysis

Socket shield technique: A systemic review and meta-analysis

Assessment of Technique Sensitivity and Gingival Health in Management of Cervical Lesions Performed Using Subgingival Clamp Versus Retraction Cord: A Randomized Controlled Clinical Trial

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About