Nabil Khzam1,2, Himanshu Arora1, Paul Kim1, Anthony Fisher1, Nikos Mattheos3, Saso Ivanovski1. 1. School of Dentistry and Oral Health, Griffith University, Gold Coast, Queensland, Australia. 2. University of Tripoli, Tripoli, Libya. 3. Faculty of Dentistry, University of Hong Kong, Prince Philip Dental Hospital, Hong Kong SAR, China.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The aim of this review is to assess the outcome of single-tooth immediate implant placement and restoration (IPR) in the maxillary anterior region, with a particular emphasis on soft tissue and esthetic outcomes. METHODS: An electronic search in Medline, EBSCOhost, and Ovid (PubMed) was performed to identify studies that reported on soft tissue outcomes following immediate placement and restoration of implants in the maxillary esthetic region with a mean follow-up of ≥1 year. RESULTS: Nineteen studies on single implants inserted immediately into fresh extraction sockets and provisionally restored in the maxillary esthetic region were included. Soft tissue changes were found to be acceptable, with most studies reporting mean gingival recession of 0.27 ± 0.38 mm and mean papillary height loss of 0.23 ± 0.27 mm after follow-up of ≥1 year. Advanced buccal recession (>1 mm) occurred in 11% of cases. Long-term follow-up studies (>2 years) reported that the interdental papillae, in particular, showed a tendency to rebound over time. The few studies that reported on patient-centered outcomes showed a high level of patient satisfaction with the outcomes of IPR treatment. CONCLUSIONS: The IPR protocol resulted in generally acceptable soft tissue and esthetic outcomes, with suboptimal results reported in ≈11% of low-risk cases. Factors such as preoperative tissue biotype or use of a flap or connective tissue graft did not significantly influence soft tissue and esthetic outcomes. Long-term prospective controlled clinical trials are necessary to identify factors that may influence the esthetic outcomes associated with IPR.
BACKGROUND: The aim of this review is to assess the outcome of single-tooth immediate implant placement and restoration (IPR) in the maxillary anterior region, with a particular emphasis on soft tissue and esthetic outcomes. METHODS: An electronic search in Medline, EBSCOhost, and Ovid (PubMed) was performed to identify studies that reported on soft tissue outcomes following immediate placement and restoration of implants in the maxillary esthetic region with a mean follow-up of ≥1 year. RESULTS: Nineteen studies on single implants inserted immediately into fresh extraction sockets and provisionally restored in the maxillary esthetic region were included. Soft tissue changes were found to be acceptable, with most studies reporting mean gingival recession of 0.27 ± 0.38 mm and mean papillary height loss of 0.23 ± 0.27 mm after follow-up of ≥1 year. Advanced buccal recession (>1 mm) occurred in 11% of cases. Long-term follow-up studies (>2 years) reported that the interdental papillae, in particular, showed a tendency to rebound over time. The few studies that reported on patient-centered outcomes showed a high level of patient satisfaction with the outcomes of IPR treatment. CONCLUSIONS: The IPR protocol resulted in generally acceptable soft tissue and esthetic outcomes, with suboptimal results reported in ≈11% of low-risk cases. Factors such as preoperative tissue biotype or use of a flap or connective tissue graft did not significantly influence soft tissue and esthetic outcomes. Long-term prospective controlled clinical trials are necessary to identify factors that may influence the esthetic outcomes associated with IPR.
Authors: Sara Bakkali; María Rizo-Gorrita; Manuel-María Romero-Ruiz; José Luis Gutiérrez-Pérez; Daniel Torres-Lagares; Maria Ángeles Serrera-Figallo Journal: Clin Oral Investig Date: 2021-01-29 Impact factor: 3.573
Authors: Alexander Fügl; Werner Zechner; Alessandro Pozzi; Guido Heydecke; Christine Mirzakhanian; Nikolaus Behneke; Alexandra Behneke; Russell A Baer; Robert Nölken; Edward Gottesman; Snjezana Colic Journal: Clin Oral Investig Date: 2016-11-18 Impact factor: 3.573
Authors: Wouter G van Nimwegen; Gerry M Raghoebar; Elise G Zuiderveld; Ronald E Jung; Henny J A Meijer; Sven Mühlemann Journal: Clin Oral Implants Res Date: 2018-05-27 Impact factor: 5.977
Authors: Sandra AlTarawneh; Ahmad A S Hamdan; Abeer Alhadidi; Susan Hattar; Mohammad Al-Rabab'ah; Zaid Baqain Journal: Dent Res J (Isfahan) Date: 2020-03-17
Authors: Wilson Matsumoto; Victor Garone Morelli; Rossana Pereira de Almeida; Alexandre Elias Trivellato; Cássio Edvard Sverzut; Takami Hirono Hotta Journal: Case Rep Dent Date: 2018-06-06
Authors: Luigi Canullo; Paolo Pesce; Donato Antonacci; Andrea Ravidà; Matthew Galli; Shahnawaz Khijmatgar; Grazia Tommasato; Anton Sculean; Massimo Del Fabbro Journal: Clin Oral Investig Date: 2021-10-20 Impact factor: 3.606
Authors: Russell A Baer; Robert Nölken; Snjezana Colic; Guido Heydecke; Christine Mirzakhanian; Alexandra Behneke; Nikolaus Behneke; Edward Gottesman; Liliana Ottria; Alessandro Pozzi; Alexander Fügl; Werner Zechner Journal: Clin Oral Investig Date: 2022-01-08 Impact factor: 3.573