The need for socket preservation: a systematic review

Alenazi, Adel; Alotaibi, Abdulrahman Abdullah; Aljaeidi, Yazaid; Alqhtani, Nasser Raqe

doi:10.25122/jml-2021-0308

Cited by 7 publications

(8 citation statements)

References 12 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The need of socket preservation immediately after tooth extraction should be determined by the aesthetic, functional and risk-related viewpoint [ 13 , 21 ]: in the case of a treatment plan with implant-supported prosthodontics of the extracted tooth with risk of excessive resorption after tooth extraction and/or aesthetic impact of the tooth, socket preservation is suggested [ 22 ]. Alenazi et al underlined the need for socket preservation after tooth extraction in the case of future implant prosthesis in order to have correct bone volume [ 23 ].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Socket Preservation after Tooth Extraction: Particulate Autologous Bone vs. Deproteinized Bovine Bone

Chisci¹,

Hatia

Chisci³

et al. 2023

Bioengineering

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: The technique of socket preservation after tooth extraction allows for less volumetric decrease after tooth extraction. The aim of this retrospective study was to evaluate differences between alveolar socket preservation performed with deproteinized bovine bone graft and autologous particulate bone graft taken from the mandibular ramus. Materials and Methods: This retrospective study enrolled a total of 21 consecutive patients. A total of 11 patients underwent socket preservation with deproteinized bovine bone graft and collagen matrix (group A), and 10 patients underwent socket preservation performed with particulate autologous bone taken from the mandibular ramus and collagen matrix (group B). All patients received cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) before socket preservation and after four months. Alveolar bone width (ABW) values and alveolar bone height (ABH) values were measured at the first and second CBCT, and the reduction of the values in the two groups was compared. Statistical analysis was performed using Student’s t-test for independent variables, and p values < 0.05 were considered statistically significant. Results: There were no statistically significant differences between ABW reduction of group A and ABW reduction of group B (t-test value p = 0.28). There were no statistically significant differences between ABH reduction of group A and ABH reduction of group B (t-test value p = 0.10). Conclusions: In this retrospective study, no statistical differences were found between the group that received autologous particulate bone compared to the group that received deproteinized bovine bone in socket preservation.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Socket Preservation after Tooth Extraction: Particulate Autologous Bone vs. Deproteinized Bovine Bone

Chisci¹,

Hatia

Chisci³

et al. 2023

Bioengineering

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The majority of SP methods demonstrate positive results when compared to unassisted socket healing. However, some methods are effective only in vertical ridge preservation while others preserve both vertical and horizontal ridge dimensions [ 44 ].…”

Section: Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

Socket Preservation and Guided Bone Regeneration: Prerequisites for Successful Implant Dentistry

Yankov

2023

Cureus

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Implant success is measured not only by implant survival but also by the long-term aesthetic and functional results. Implant placement should be prosthetically driven, with proper three-dimensional positioning for optimal support and stability of the tissues. Several procedures could be performed to ensure this requirement. While socket preservation (SP) is performed at the stage of tooth extraction, guided bone regeneration (GBR) takes place before or simultaneous to implant placement. The current review aims to summarize and discuss the procedures used for the preparation of the implant site, the preservation of the existing tissues, and their augmentation in cases of deficiency. An electronic search using Google Scholar, PubMed, and Scopus was conducted up to October 2023, in accordance with Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. The review summarizes the current knowledge on SP and GBR as prerequisites for future implant placement. Their indications, advantages, and limitations have been thoroughly evaluated and some recommendations for further research have been suggested. Implant placement in sites with severe bone resorption is extremely challenging. It necessitates the application of different surgical techniques, especially augmentation procedures, including guided bone regeneration. The need for such procedures could be avoided or at least minimized by the execution of SP after tooth extraction or immediate/early implant placement.

show abstract

“…2,4,5,9 Alveolar ridge volume deficiencies may interfere with tooth replacement therapy via fixed dental prosthesis, such as implant-supported restorations.11 Alveolar ridge preservation (ARP) therapy is commonly indicated to prevent extensive alveolar ridge resorption after complete or partial tooth extraction, either as part of immediate implant placement interventions or to reduce the need for ancillary ridge augmentation prior to or at the time of delayed implant placement. 8,11 Socket preservation by any procedure, performed at the time of extraction for the purpose of minimizing resorption of the bone crest and buccal plate and maximizing bone formation in the alveoli, is very important. This principle, called osteopromotion, can be very successful irrespective of the cause of tooth loss.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Effectiveness of Socket Preservation in Maintaining Alveolar Bone Volume: A Systematic Review

Lubis,

Ervina,

Amalia

2024

interdental

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Introduction: Alveolar bone undergoes dimensional changes due to resorption after tooth extraction, which can make it difficult to place a denture or implant. Preservation socket procedures are performed at the time of tooth extraction with the aim of minimizing alveolar bone resorption. The purpose of this systematic review is to analyze the effectiveness of socket preservation in preserving alveolar bone. Review: This systematic review was conducted through an electronic literature search in PubMed, Wiley, and Sciencedirect, which was used to obtain a number of Randomized Clinical Trial (RCT) articles on the effectiveness of socket preservation with graft material versus no socket preservation. This systematic review was conducted following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews (PRISMA) guidelines. Based on the 417 articles screened, there were 24 duplicates, and after the articles were included by the criteria of: RCT, human study, publication in English, within the last five years and focusing on the methods and outcomes of socket preservation, 5 articles were found to be relevant. Conclusion: Of the five studies reviewed, one study using allograft material and four studies using xenograft material, the results were that socket preservation can reduce alveolar bone resorption and can maintain the horizontal and vertical dimensions of alveolar bone compared to no socket preservation

show abstract

The need for socket preservation: a systematic review

Cited by 7 publications

References 12 publications

Socket Preservation after Tooth Extraction: Particulate Autologous Bone vs. Deproteinized Bovine Bone

Socket Preservation after Tooth Extraction: Particulate Autologous Bone vs. Deproteinized Bovine Bone

Socket Preservation and Guided Bone Regeneration: Prerequisites for Successful Implant Dentistry

Effectiveness of Socket Preservation in Maintaining Alveolar Bone Volume: A Systematic Review

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About