Evaluation of Outcomes of Dental Implants Inserted by Flapless or Flapped Procedure

Zhuang, Jiabao; Zhao, Dan; Wu, Yaqin; Xu, Chun

doi:10.1097/id.0000000000000820

Cited by 8 publications

(9 citation statements)

References 35 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In the same study, the single implants of the test group, which should receive the definitive abutment at the time of surgery, were submitted to a disconnection for the installation of the screw‐retained crown, in the same way as was done for the single and multiple implants of the control group (Molina et al, ). The study by Grandi et al used a technique without flap and immediate loading (Grandi et al, ), which may have influenced peri‐implant marginal bone loss (Zhuang, Zhao, Wu, & Xu, ). In addition, the implants were restored with cement‐retained prostheses, which may undergo interference from other factors such as the presence of luting agent excess in the peri‐implant space (Linkevicius, Puisys, Vindasiute, Linkeviciene, & Apse, ; Linkevicius, Vindasiute, et al, ).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The study by Grandi et al. used a technique without flap and immediate loading (Grandi et al, 2012), which may have influenced peri-implant marginal bone loss (Zhuang, Zhao, Wu, & Xu, 2018). In addition, the implants were restored with cement-retained prostheses, which may undergo interference from other factors such as the presence of luting agent excess in the peri-implant space (Linkevicius, Puisys, Vindasiute, Linkeviciene, & Apse, 2013;.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Influence of abutment disconnection on peri‐implant marginal bone loss: A randomized clinical trial

Praça¹,

Teixeira

Rêgo³

2020

Clinical Oral Implants Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objectives To evaluate the influence of abutment disconnections and reconnections on peri‐implant marginal bone loss. Material and methods Twenty‐four participants received single‐unit implants and were randomly assigned into one of the two groups: the definitive abutment group (DEF), in which the definitive abutments were connected at the same time as the implant was inserted; and as a control, the healing abutment group (HEA), in which the healing abutments were disconnected and reconnected three times, at 8, 10, and 12 weeks after surgery. Peri‐implant marginal bone level was measured through radiographic follow‐up performed immediately after the surgery (baseline), at 8 weeks and after 6, 12, and 24 months. Implant stability and peri‐implant health were assessed by resonance frequency analysis and peri‐implant probing, respectively. Results At the end of 2 years, the mean bone level was −0.18 ± 0.12 mm for the DEF group and −0.13 ± 0.13 mm for the HEA group, resulting in a cumulative bone loss of −0.61 ± 0.10 mm and −0.81 ± 0.15 mm, respectively, with no statistical difference between groups. Bone level changes showed statistically significant differences only between 0 and 2 months (DEF: −0.70 ± 0.12 mm; HEA: −0.36 ± 0.10 mm) and between 2 and 6 months (DEF: −0.11 ± 0.11 mm; HEA: −0.65 ± 0.14 mm). No differences were observed between the groups for implant stability, probing depth, and bleeding on probing. Conclusion Immediate connection of the prosthetic abutments did not reduce bone loss in comparison with three disconnections of the healing abutments.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Influence of abutment disconnection on peri‐implant marginal bone loss: A randomized clinical trial

Praça¹,

Teixeira

Rêgo³

2020

Clinical Oral Implants Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…These could involve trauma to the surrounding hard and soft tissues during tooth removal [14] or a reduction in alveolar bone because of periodontal or peri-apical pathology. Soft tissue elevation could also have a negative impact on bone preservation, and it is suggested that a flapless surgical approach could reduce the amount of bone loss [15][16][17][18]. It is assumed that alveolar bone remodeling is thus affected by various simultaneous factors, and its magnitude is patient, site and time dependent [19].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Contour Changes Following Immediate Placement of Ultra-Wide Implants in Molar Extraction Sockets without Bone Grafting

Hattingh

Weehaeghe

et al. 2020

JCM

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The aim was to evaluate ridge reduction and mucosal recession following immediate placement of ultra-wide implants in molar sockets, without bone grafting. Impressions were taken prior to tooth extraction, 4 months and 1 year after implant placement. The casts were digitized and compared. Mucosal recessions and horizontal ridge reduction were measured. A total of 16 implants were in the maxilla and 11 in the mandible. At the buccal aspect, there was a mean reduction of 0.94 mm after 4 months and 0.89 mm after one year (p = 0.933). At the palatal/lingual aspect, this was 1.09 mm after 4 months and 0.69 mm after 1 year (p = 0.001). After 1 year, a recession of 0.59 mm was measured at the zenith, 1.04 mm at the mesial and 0.98 mm at the distal papilla. The mean midfacial horizontal ridge reduction was 1.23 mm after 4 months and 1.45 mm after 1 year. At the midpalatal/midlingual aspect, the mean horizontal reduction was 1.43 mm after 4 months and 1.16 mm after 1 year. Immediate implant placement without bone grafting in the posterior jaw yields a significant horizontal ridge reduction and minor mucosal recession. Clinicians should anticipate the amount of ridge reduction and consider augmentation at the time of implant placement.

show abstract

“…Clinicians have attempted every method to prevent MBL and decrease absorption of the buccal bone plate [34][35]. The buccal bone-periodontal ligament (BB-PDL) complex is considered to be very important for maintaining alveolar ridge contour.…”

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

Evaluation of Outcomes of Dental Implants Inserted by Flapless or Flapped Procedure

Abstract: This meta-analysis revealed that flapless procedure may increase the failure risk of the dental implants, especially in the situation of immediate/early loading. Nevertheless, flapless procedure showed a superiority in preserving bone tissues.

Cited by 8 publications

References 35 publications

Influence of abutment disconnection on peri‐implant marginal bone loss: A randomized clinical trial

Influence of abutment disconnection on peri‐implant marginal bone loss: A randomized clinical trial

Contour Changes Following Immediate Placement of Ultra-Wide Implants in Molar Extraction Sockets without Bone Grafting

Socket shield technique: A systemic review and meta-analysis

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About