Evaluation of the influence of implant placement timing on the esthetic outcomes of single tooth implant treatment in the anterior maxilla: A retrospective study

Selection criteria for immediate implant placement and immediate loading for single tooth replacement in the maxillary esthetic zone: A systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this study was to review available evidence for Type 1A (immediate implant placement and immediate loading) of single tooth replacement in the maxillary esthetic zone.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

An electronic search was conducted utilizing the databases of MEDLINE, Embase, and Cochrane to identify publications reporting on the outcomes of Type 1A for single tooth replacement in the maxillary esthetic zone. The success and survival rates of the included articles were reported, which were further categorized according to the clinical criteria reported in Type 1A. Mean survival rates were univariately compared between risk groups and additionally between studies published before and since 2012 using bias-corrected and study size-weighed bootstrap tests. A study time-correcting meta-analysis was then performed to obtain an overall effect for the study pool.

RESULTS

A total of 3118 publications were identified in the search, with a total of 68 articles included. A mean number of implants per study were 37.2 and mean follow-up was 2.8 years. All the included studies utilizing Type 1A report highly selective inclusion and exclusion criteria. Univariate risk group comparison determined that studies before 2012 report a significantly lower mean survival rate (difference of -1.9 percentage points [PP], 95% CI: [-0.3, -4.0], p = .02), facial gap dimension had an impact on survival rates (+3.1 PP [0.2, 5.3] for width >2 mm, p = .04), as well as presence of endodontic infection (+2.6 PP [0.9, 5.1], p = .004).

CONCLUSIONS

Type 1A has a high survival rate in studies reporting strict patient and site selection criteria. Further research is required to assess esthetic and functional success with Type 1A treatments.

Polycaprolactone versus collagen membrane and 1‐year clinical outcomes: A randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Polycaprolactone (PCL) is a synthetic aliphatic polyester widely used in biomedical applications with biodegradability in the body and promotes cell proliferation and differentiation. A newly developed bilayered PCL membrane was developed for possibly being used as a membrane in guided bone regeneration (GBR).

PURPOSE

To compare the clinical efficacy between a newly developed bilayered PCL membrane with a Cytoplast™ RTM collagen membrane for GBR with simultaneous implant placement.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Twenty-four patients were randomized to PCL or RTM group, and a total of 24 dental implants were placed. Primary outcomes were patient mean buccal bone thickness (BBT) immediately postimplantation and at 6 months using cone-beam CT and soft tissue surface dimensional changes (STC) at crown insertion, 6 months, and 1 year after loading using intraoral scanner. Secondary outcomes included success rate, clinical parameters, healing index, implant stability, pink esthetic score, and marginal bone levels.

RESULTS

The percentage of reduced BBT at 6 months was 32.38%, 25.94%, and 23.96% in the test group and 34.42%, 14.75%, and 6.34% in the control group at the corresponding levels. The mean difference of changed BBT associated with PCL membrane, when compared to collagen membrane, at 6 months was -0.02 ± 0.18 mm (95% confidence interval [CI]: -0.40 to 0.35), 0.29 ± 0.28 mm (95% CI: -0.29 to 0.87), and 0.62 ± 0.38 mm (95% CI: -0.17 to 1.42) at 0, 2, and 4 mm from implant shoulder. Minimal loss of STC was observed in both groups up to 1 year of loading. The mean difference loss of surface dimensional change associated with PCL membrane, when compared to collagen membrane, at 1 year of loading was 0.31 ± 0.19 mm (95% CI: -0.07 to 0.70), 0.22 ± 0.26 mm (95% CI: -0.33 to 0.76), and 0.17 ± 0.30 mm (95% CI: -0.45 to 0.78) at 0, 2, and 4 mm from implant shoulder. None of these differences were statistically significant (unpaired t-test, degrees of freedom [df] = 22; p > 0.05).

CONCLUSION

Within the limits of this trial, both barrier membranes resulted in comparable outcomes for GBR with implant placement after 1 year in function. Further research is necessary with a larger sample size.

Immediate versus Delayed Implantation for Single-Tooth Restoration of Maxillary Anterior Teeth: A Comparative Analysis on Efficacy

Objective

The present research is aimed at determining the efficacy of immediate implantation (II) and delayed implantation (DI) for single-tooth restoration of maxillary anterior teeth.

Methods

From February 2019 to June 2020, 80 patients who received single-tooth restoration of maxillary anterior teeth in Suzhou Kowloon Hospital, Shanghai Jiaotong University School of Medicine, were included, among which 38 cases with DI restoration were used as the control group (CG), and the remaining 42 cases with II were used as the research group (RG). The complications that occurred were recorded. Besides, subjective satisfaction (Visual Analogue Scale (VAS)), aesthetic effect after anterior teeth trauma restoration (Pink Esthetic Score (PES)), aesthetics of dental hard tissue (White Esthetic Score (WES)), pocket depth assessed by pure titanium periodontal probe, implant stability (Implant Stability Quotient (ISQ)), and oral health-related quality of life (Oral Health Impact Profile- (OHIP-) 14) were evaluated. Attachment height, general look, color, and chewing function were all much higher in RG than in CG, according to the evaluation results. Furthermore, at 3 months, 6 months, and 12 months after surgery, RG had greater PES, WES, ISQ, and OHIP-14 scores, while the periodontal depth was decreased. In both groups of patients, the incidence of complications was similar, with no discernible differences.

Success Rates and Complications Associated with Single Immediate Implants: A Systematic Review

This study examined the success rates of single immediate implants and their associated biological, hardware and aesthetic complications. Using a developed search strategy, randomized controlled trials (RCTs) on single-unit immediate implants with at least six human participants, a minimum follow-up time of 12 months and published between January 1999 and January 2021 were identified. Data was extracted independently using pre-designed data extraction forms. Information on success rates and associated biological, hardware and aesthetic complications were obtained and assessed. Out of 191 potentially eligible studies, 26 RCTs assessing 1270 patients with a total of 1326 single implants were included and further evaluated. In this review, success rate was reported to be 96.7–100% over a total of 9 studies. However, there was a lack of consensus on a universal success criterion between authors emphasizing the need for agreement. The average follow up was 29 months and most reported complications were aesthetic (63 cases, 4.7%), whilst there were relatively fewer biological, (20 cases, 1.5%), and hardware complications (24 cases, 1.8%). Success rate is an uncommon clinical outcome with 9 out of 26 of the selected RCTs reporting it. In these studies, single immediate implants showed a high success rate with low numbers of biological and hardware complications, and high patient satisfaction with aesthetics were reported in the short-term follow-up of one year.

Clinical esthetic comparison between monolithic high-translucency multilayer zirconia and traditional veneered zirconia for single implant restoration in maxillary esthetic areas: Prosthetic and patient-centered outcomes

Background/purpose

Clinical esthetic evidence for the performance of monolithic high-translucency multilayer zirconia is lacking. The aim of this study was to compare monolithic high-translucency multilayer zirconia with traditional veneered zirconia in clinical situation.

Material and methods

A total of 30 participants who were provided with both monolithic zirconia crowns (Group 1) and traditional veneered crowns (Group 2) for single implant restoration in maxillary esthetic areas were enrolled. Patients' subjective outcome (Visual Analog Scale, VAS) were recorded. Photos were taken and then evaluated by 9 evaluators with Pink and White Esthetic Score (WES). Wilcoxon signed rank test was used for comparison between Group 1 and Group 2 in VAS, WES and five variables in WES. Kendall's coefficient of concordance test was used to calculate inter-rater reliability of WES variables. Spearman correlation was used to analyze association between patients' outcome and evaluators' scores.

Results

There was no significant difference in patients' subjective outcome between monolithic zirconia and traditional veneered crowns: overall VAS were 9.0 (8.0–9.0) and 9.0 (8.5–9.5), respectively (P > 0.05). However, in professional view, significant difference between Group 1 and Group 2 in WES was observed: 7.5 (6.0–8.0) and 8.0 (6.5–8.5), respectively (P < 0.05). Kendall's test showed, among WES variables, translucency demonstrated the highest agreement. Professionally reported evaluations did not correlate with patient-reported outcomes (Spearman correlation were 0.246 and 0.224 for Group 1 and Group 2, respectively).

Conclusion

Within the limitation of this study, it can be concluded that monolithic high-translucency multilayer zirconia restoration might be a treatment modality.

Facial alveolar bone alterations and gray value changes based on cone beam computed tomography around maxillary anterior implants: A clinical retrospective study of 1-3 years

OBJECTIVES

The purpose of this cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) study was to describe facial alveolar bone alterations and gray value (GV) changes around implants in aesthetic anterior maxilla with simultaneous guided bone regeneration (GBR) and to investigate potential influence of factors related to vertical alveolar bone stability, such as particle sizes of the deproteinized bovine bone mineral (DBBM) used.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A retrospective study design was adopted. Four facio-palatal cross-sectional CBCT images of 166 implants from 124 patients who had maxillary anterior implants were obtained. Measurements of the vertical facial alveolar bone level (VFBL), horizontal facial alveolar bone thickness (HFBT), and GV were identified of 1-3 years. Then, correlation coefficients for those parameters were calculated. Finally, linear mixed models were established to investigate potential factors influencing vertical alveolar bone resorption.

RESULTS

Facial alveolar bone underwent fast bone modeling and remodeling during the first 6 months, with decreases of 1.00 ± 1.19 and 0.74 ± 0.86 mm in VFBL and HFBT in implant shoulder, respectively, and there was positive and significant correlation between the alterations in VFBL and HFBT1 (r_s  = .516, p = .000). Linear mixed models identified particle size of DBBM as a critical factor associated with vertical bone resorption (p = .000). The GV gradually increased during the follow-up period.

CONCLUSIONS

Rapid and unavoidable peri-implant bone resorption usually happened during the first 6 months after implant placement. GBR is a predictable treatment for maxillary anterior implants, since GV has an increasing trend. Large bone particles of DBBM help maintain vertical alveolar bone stability.