Immediate and conventional single implant treatment in the anterior maxilla: 1-year results of a case series on hard and soft tissue response and aesthetics
- 27 January 2011
- journal article
- Published by Wiley in Journal of Clinical Periodontology
- Vol. 38 (4), 385-394
- https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-051x.2010.01687.x
Abstract
To document midfacial soft tissue dynamics following single immediate implant treatment (IIT) and conventional implant treatment (CIT) in the anterior maxilla when performed by experienced clinicians in well-selected patients. Material and Methods: Appropriate bone volume and ideal soft tissue levels were considered requirements for implant therapy. Additional prerequisites for IIT were intact socket walls and a thick gingival biotype. CIT included standard flap elevation whereas IIT was either performed with a flap or flapless procedure. All implants were provisionally restored using cemented acrylic crowns. Bone levels, papillae and midfacial soft tissue levels were monitored at regular intervals. The aesthetic outcome was assessed after 1 year using the pink aesthetic score (PES) and white aesthetic score (WES). Results: Sixteen patients (10 men, six women; mean age 45) received an immediate implant and 23 patients (12 men, 11 women; mean age 40) had conventional implant surgery. One immediate implant failed in the early healing phase. The mean bone level from the implant-abutment interface was 0.85 mm for IIT and 0.65 mm for CIT after 1 year (p=0.144). Mesial papillae remained stable over time. Minute loss of distal papillae occurred following IIT (-0.38 mm) and a tendency for re-growth was found following CIT (0.60 mm). Midfacial soft tissues remained stable over time following IIT with only 7% showing advanced recession (>1 mm). Flapless surgery induced less midfacial recession than flap surgery (p=0.023). Significant midfacial recession occurred following CIT (-1 mm). Overall, 24% were aesthetic failures (PES<8 and/or WES<6) and 8% showed an (almost) perfect outcome (PES12 and WES9). The remainder (68%) demonstrated acceptable aesthetics. Conclusions: Immediate implants demonstrated fairly stable midfacial soft tissue levels with only a minority of cases showing advanced recession. Irrespective of the timing of implant placement, aesthetic failures seem to be rather common and only a strict minority may show perfectionKeywords
This publication has 38 references indexed in Scilit:
- Prospective Evaluation of Immediate and Delayed Provisional Single Tooth RestorationsJournal of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, 2009
- Immediate Implant Placement Postextraction Without Flap ElevationThe Journal of Periodontology, 2009
- Outcome Evaluation of Early Placed Maxillary Anterior Single‐Tooth Implants Using Objective Esthetic Criteria: A Cross‐Sectional, Retrospective Study in 45 Patients With a 2‐ to 4‐Year Follow‐Up Using Pink and White Esthetic ScoresThe Journal of Periodontology, 2009
- Early Implant Placement With Simultaneous Guided Bone Regeneration Following Single‐Tooth Extraction in the Esthetic Zone: 12‐Month Results of a Prospective Study With 20 Consecutive PatientsThe Journal of Periodontology, 2009
- Ridge alterations following immediate implant placement in the dog: flap versus flapless surgeryJournal of Clinical Periodontology, 2008
- A prospective clinical study of non‐submerged immediate implants: clinical outcomes and esthetic resultsClinical Oral Implants Research, 2007
- Tissue alterations at implant‐supported single‐tooth replacements: a 1‐year prospective clinical studyClinical Oral Implants Research, 2005
- Ridge alterations following implant placement in fresh extraction sockets: an experimental study in the dogJournal of Clinical Periodontology, 2005
- Hard‐tissue alterations following immediate implant placement in extraction sitesJournal of Clinical Periodontology, 2004
- Recession of the soft tissue margin at oral implants. A 2‐year longitudinal prospective study.Clinical Oral Implants Research, 1996