Immediate Implant Placement in Non-Infected Sockets versus Infected Sockets: a Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Case report and literature review: autonomous robotic system assisted palatal implantation at an anterior teeth site compromised by periapical cyst

Background

Immediate implant placement (IIP), which preserves gingival height and papilla shape while simultaneously accelerating the implant treatment period, has become a popular method due to its commendable clinical outcomes. Nonetheless, deploying immediate implants demands specific preconditions concerning the remaining alveolar bone. This poses a challenge to the accuracy of implant surgery.

Case presentation

In this report, we present the case of a 60-year-old woman with a left upper anterior tooth crown dislodged for over a month. Cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) revealed the absence of a labial bone wall on tooth 22, a remaining 1 mm bone wall on the labial side of the root apex, and a 17.2 mm*8.9 mm*4.7 mm shadow in the periapical region of the root apices of teeth 21 and 22, with the narrowest width on the sagittal plane being approximately 5 mm. After the surgeon removed the cyst, they completed the subsequent implantation surgery using an autonomous robot in a challenging aesthetic area. This method circumvented the potential exposure of the screw thread on the labial implant surface, assured initial implant stability.

Conclusion

Five months after the operation, the dental crown was restored. The implant remained stable, with yielding notable clinical results. To the best of our knowledge, this clinical case is the first to report the feasibility and precision of immediate implantation in anterior teeth site with periapical cyst removal, performed by an autonomous robotic surgical system. Autonomous robots exhibit exceptional accuracy by accurately controlling axial and angular errors. It can improve the accuracy of implant surgery, which may become a key technology for changing implant surgery. However, further clinical trials are still needed to provide a basis for the rapid development of robotic surgery field.

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.

Implants placed into alveoli with periapical lesions: an experimental study in dogs

OBJECTIVE

To histologically analyze the effect of a curettage of the granulation tissue on healing at implants installed immediately after the extraction of teeth presenting periapical lesions.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

In seven dogs, the dental pulp was removed from the pulp chamber and from the root canals of the right and left third and the fourth mandibular premolars and of the left second premolar. The chambers were left opened and, after 3 months, apical lesions were present, and the premolars were extracted. One alveolus each premolar was selected and, before implant installation, the apical lesions of two alveoli were curetted (curettage group) while the other three were not treated (no-treatment group). The second right premolar was also extracted (Negative control group). Six implants each dog were installed, and a fully submerged healing was allowed. Four months after, biopsies were collected, and histological analyses were performed.

RESULTS

The proportions of new bone at the entire body of the implant was 70.2 ± 10.7% at the no-treatment group, 72.1 ± 14.8% at the curettage group, and 69.6 ± 3.7% at the negative control group. The respective new bone proportion at the apical aspect of the implants was 68.4 ± 17.5%, 61.5 ± 27.3%, and 78.1 ± 5.7%. None of the differences among the various groups were statistically significant. No inflammatory infiltrates were seen in the apical region.

CONCLUSIONS

In this experimental study, it is concluded that the removal of the granulation tissue seems not to be necessary to obtain a proper osseointegration of implants installed immediately after the extraction of teeth presenting a periapical lesion.