Esthetic outcomes of immediate implants placement following immediate restoration: Controlled clinical trial

Abstract

The aim of this controlled clinical trial was to evaluate the variation in the thickness of the buccal bone plate and the position of the gingival margin in single implants installed in extraction socket and in healed ridges, both with immediate loading in aesthetic region. Materials and Methods: individuals in group 1 (n=7) were treated with minimally invasive tooth extraction, cone morse implant (Neodent®), xenogene bone “gap” filling (Bio Oss®) and cementation of provisional crown. Individuals in group 2 (n=3), in edentulous unitary ridges, received a cone morse implant (Neodent®) and provisional crown cementation. The coronal (C), mid (M) and apical (A) points of the buccal bone plate (BBP) were measured by means of computed tomography and, with the aid of a probing guide, the measurements of the position of the gingival margin (PGM) were performed at the mesial (M), vestibular (V) and distal (D) points, both analyzes were assessed in the preoperative (T0), immediate postoperative (T1) and six months postoperatively (T2). Results: in the analysis of buccal bone plate (BBP), no statistical differences were observed in the interaction of period and group factors, the same happened when comparing only the different periods. Group 1, when compared to group 2 in T1, presented higher averages in the buccal bone plate (p <0.05), and this statistical difference was significant. In the PGM analysis, there was no significant statistical difference between the groups and periods interaction, the same could be observed when comparing the groups with each other (p> 0.05). A statistical difference between time T0 and T2 was observed, with time T2 having a mean of the measurements greater than the time T0 in both groups. Conclusions: the treatment conferred in group 1 was shown to be a reliable option, with results of vestibular bone thickness and gingival level stable in the observed periods, when compared with group 2 treatment. With similar results between groups, the advantages of immediate implant as reduction of postoperative morbidity, reduction of medication use and maintenance of the perimplant framework become attractive for indication of the technique tested