Evaluation of Bone Stability and Esthetic Results After Immediate Implant Placement Using a Novel Synthetic Bone Substitute in the Anterior Zone: Results After 12 Months

Abstract

The aim of this study was to assess bone and soft tissue changes after tooth extraction and immediate implant insertion in the anterior maxilla. A novel synthetic bone graft (VivOss, Straumann) was used to fill the gap between the implant surface and the alveolar bone. Implants with a reduced diameter compared to the size of the socket were used. A fixed or removable provisional restoration was provided immediately after implant placement. Cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) scans were taken to evaluate bone changes, showing minor variations after 12 months of follow-up. To evaluate soft tissue changes, clinical vertical measurements were performed. Based on the results obtained from 15 implants placed in 14 patients, it can be concluded that the use of an immediate implant in combination with a synthetic bone graft and immediate provisionalization seems to be a predictable treatment option with satisfactory esthetic results after 1 year.

Immediate implant placement with or without connective tissue graft: A systematic review and meta‐analysis

“…Cosyn et al (2013) described a need for soft tissue grafting in one third of the patients. These patients remained stable in terms of mid‐facial soft tissue level over 10‐year follow‐up (Seyssens et al, 2020a,2020b), yet more research is needed to elucidate the true need for soft tissue grafting following IIP based on clear criteria.…”

“…Second, the observation period of included studies ranged from 12 to 36 month, which is quite short. Long‐term data are of critical importance since progressive mid‐facial recession may still occur after many years of function (Kan et al, 2011; Seyssens et al, 2020a,2020b). Finally, there is no information on the three‐dimensional implant position in any of the included studies since CBCT analyses were seldomly performed (Noelken et al, 2018).…”

“…Finally, there is no information on the three‐dimensional implant position in any of the included studies since CBCT analyses were seldomly performed (Noelken et al, 2018). This is important since buccal implant shoulder position has been associated with mid‐facial recession and is likely to occur, especially following free‐handed IIP (Benic et al, 2012; Chen & Buser, 2009, 2014; Cosyn et al, 2012b; Seyssens et al, 2020a,2020b). Since free‐handed implant installation was performed in all included studies, it is unclear in how many cases mid‐facial recession resulted from buccal implant shoulder position.…”

Analysis of Alveolar Bone Morphology of the Maxillary Central and Lateral Incisors with Normal Occlusion

“…In a previous report, alloplastic β-tricalcium phosphate was applied with a resorbable collagen barrier membrane for bone augmentation in immediate implant placement [19]. Moreover, graft material was inserted within the gap between the implant surface and the bony wall [20]. A combinational approach with a connective tissue graft and guided bone regeneration was performed at the convexity area of the labial surface in the implant site [21,22].…”

“…The final implant position was shifted toward the labial direction when compared with the initial planning [35]. Implants with a narrower diameter when compared with the diameter of the extracted socket can be considered [20]. It was mentioned that one-fourth of the cases were not ideal for flapless immediate implant placement because of the missing labial bony wall [18].…”