Mean Pink Esthetic Score Research Articles

The Socket Shield Technique: Stability of the Buccal Peri-implant Bone after Partial Root Removal - A Prospective Case Series of 20 patients, with 18 Months Follow-up.

This study aims to collect data on implant survival, bone volume maintenance, and complications associated with the socket shield technique. The socket shield technique was introduced in 2010. Since then, several systematic reviews have been published, showing good clinical outcomes. The behaviour of the buccal bone plate is so far not completely understood. The study involved the placement of 23 implants using the socket shield technique in 20 patients. AstraTech EV implants were used, and no bone substitutes or connective tissue grafts were applied. Patients were monitored for 18 months, recording implant survival, volumetric bone analysis on CBCT scans, interproximal bone levels, bone sounding, pink esthetic scores, and complications. Prosthetic procedures were also described, including temporary and final restorations. A 95.7% cumulative 18-month implant survival rate was obtained using the socket shield technique, with a significant but limited reduction in buccal bone thickness (BBT) after implant placement. One implant did not integrate and two shields were partially exposed. The mean pink esthetic score, 1 year after loading was 12.93 ± 1.22. The study suggests that the socket shield technique can result in limited reduction of the buccal bone volume, with a high implant survival rate. Re-entry studies are recommended to investigate the causes of bone resorption.

The Long-Term Esthetic and Radiographic Outcome of Implants Placed in the Anterior Maxilla after Ridge Preservation, Combining Bovine Xenograft with Collagen Matrix.

The objective of the study was to evaluate the long-term esthetic and radiographic results of implants placed in the anterior maxilla after ridge preservation, combining bovine xenograft with collagen matrix. Fifteen patients who required a single tooth extraction because of fracture, root resorption, or extended caries were included in the study. After extraction, all sites were grafted using Deproteinized Bovine Bone Mineral (DBBM) with collagen and covered by a resorbable collagen matrix (CM). Five months after socket grafting, implants were successfully installed. The implant diameter range was between 3.8 and 4.2 mm. All patients were monitored for over 7 years, both clinically and radiographically. Three independent observers evaluated the long-term esthetic outcome, employing the Pink Esthetic Score (PES) technique. Over a period exceeding seven years, a 100% survival rate was observed for all 15 implants, with minimal marginal bone loss. The mean PES was 11.40 (±1.44) at the first assessment and 11.38 (±1.63) at the second assessment. The difference was not statistically significant (p = 0.978), and the scores of PES measurements indicated excellent esthetic results even after seven years. Based on these preliminary results, it seems that placing collagen bovine bone in a fresh extraction socket, covered with a collagen matrix, can preserve the alveolar ridge and provide long-term stable esthetic results.

Aesthetic Outcome and Patient Perception of Immediate vs. Delayed Loading of Implant-Supported Single Crowns: A Randomized Controlled Trial

ABSTRACT Background: This randomized controlled trial aimed to compare the aesthetic outcome and patient perception of immediate versus DL of implant-supported single crowns. Methods: A total of 60 patients with a single missing tooth were enrolled and randomly assigned to two groups: immediate loading (IL) and delayed loading (DL). Each group consisted of 30 patients with a total of 30 implants. In the IL group, crowns were loaded onto implants immediately after placement, while in the DL group, a healing period of 3 months was observed before crown placement. Aesthetic outcome was assessed using the Pink Esthetic Score (PES) for soft tissue and the White Esthetic Score (WES) for the crown. Patient perception was evaluated through a visual analog scale (VAS) for satisfaction, comfort, and overall experience. Results: The IL group demonstrated comparable aesthetic outcomes to the DL group, with mean PES and WES scores of 10.2 ± 1.5 and 8.7 ± 1.2, respectively, in the IL group, and 10.5 ± 1.3 and 8.5 ± 1.4 in the DL group. Patient perception in terms of satisfaction, comfort, and overall experience was similarly high in both groups, with VAS scores above 8 for each parameter. Conclusion: This randomized controlled trial suggests that both IL and DL of implant-supported single crowns result in favorable aesthetic outcomes and high levels of patient satisfaction.

The Effectiveness of Autogenous Dentin Graft as a Biomaterial in Optimizing the Esthetic Outcomes of Immediate Dental Implants: A Prospective Clinical Study

Background: Immediate implant placement in the maxillary anterior region was challenging, especially with the jumping gap and limited primary implant stability. Objective: To assess the autogenous dentin graft biomaterial's ability to improve the esthetic outcomes of an immediately inserted implant. Methods: Twenty patients with non-restorable retained roots in the maxillary non-molar region surrounded by natural sound teeth were included in this study after a complete clinical and radiological examination, including patient health and clinical fitness for the immediate dental implant procedure. A single dental implant was inserted for each patient, and the resulting jump distance was filled with the mineralized dentin graft and covered by gel foam with the figure of eight suturing. The Pink Esthetic Score index of the implant-supported prostheses was evaluated six months after the initial surgery. Results: Twenty eligible patients were included in this study. The assessment of the clinical measurements of the alveolar ridge width and gingival biotype before surgical intervention and after 6 months showed no significant differences between them. The mean Pink Esthetic Score (PES) was 7.75. Only two patients achieved a total esthetic score of 10; another three patients had a score of 8, four with a score of 7, and the rest with a score of 6. Conclusion: An autogenous dentine graft effectively achieves acceptable esthetic results with an isolated immediate dental implant inserted in the anterior maxillary area.

Clinical, Radiological, and Aesthetic Outcomes after Placement of a Bioactive-Surfaced Implant with Immediate or Delayed Loading in the Anterior Maxilla: 1-Year Retrospective Follow-Up Study

Background: Dental implants have become the standard for replacing missing teeth. However, patients’ demands for shorter treatment times and the desire for aesthetics in their results can complicate the rehabilitation process, particularly when poor-quality bone is involved. In order to address these challenges, new methods of treating implant surfaces have been introduced. These methods aim to make the implants superhydrophilic and bioactive, enhancing their functionality and interactions with the surrounding tissues. Aim: The aim of the study was to retrospectively examine the efficacy of a superhydrophilic and bioactive implant for treatment of the edentulous maxillary anterior area. The study also aimed to evaluate whether this improved implant surface, by enhancing the osseointegration processes, could serve as a factor in speeding up the loading protocols. Materials and Methods: For this retrospective study, a total of 13 implants were included: 6 delayed restored implants and 7 immediately loaded implants placed in the anterior maxillary area. Clinical, radiographic, and esthetic outcomes were assessed. Baseline measurements of the insertion torque value (ITV) and stability implant quotient (ISQ) were recorded for all implants. In the early-loaded group, these measurements were also taken 30 days (t30) and 45 days (t45) after the placement of the implant to monitor their changes over time. Marginal bone loss (MBL) was calculated according to the changes in marginal bone level on intraoral X-rays taken at two different time points: at baseline and one year after loading. To evaluate the esthetic results, the pink esthetic score (PES) and the white esthetic score (WES) were assessed. For this evaluation, intraoral photographs were taken one year after implant loading. Results: A total of 7 implants were immediately restored, with a mean ITV of 32.29 ± 9.01 Ncm and a mean ISQ of 72.71 ± 2.81. These implants were placed in a bone environment with a mean density of 410.00 ± 194.42 HU. On the other hand, 6 implants with delayed loading had a mean ITV of 28.50 ± 3.27 Ncm, an ISQ of 67.92 ± 8.43, and a mean bone density of 607.50 ± 140.83 HU. The mean PES and WES after 1 year were, respectively, 8.71 ± 1.89 and 8.57 ± 0.79 for immediate and 8.33 ± 1.36 and 9.17 ± 1.33 for delayed-loaded implants. At 12 months after loading, the immediately loaded group had a MBL of 0.29 ± 0.29 mm, while the delayed-loaded group had a MBL of 0.33 ± 0.25. No statistically significant differences between the two treatment groups were found for any of the evaluated outcomes. Conclusions: Despite the limitations of this study, the obtained results may support the use of a superhydrophilic and bioactive implant surface for implant-prosthetic rehabilitation in critical loading protocols with satisfactory esthetic results.

Comparison of functional and esthetic outcomes in digital versus analog rehabilitation of one-piece screw-retained implant crowns placed at second stage surgery.

Analog and digital impressions are established procedures for restoration of single-tooth implants. In this study, single-tooth implants were restored with definitive restorations during second-stage surgery. Analog and digital workflows were compared. Eighty single-tooth implants were examined in total. In 40 implants, an index was taken immediately after implant placement using composite resin to fabricate the final crowns (analog workflow). For the other 40 single-tooth implants, intraoral intraoperative scans were performed (digital workflow) during primary surgery. The custom-fabricated screw-retained crowns were placed during second-stage surgery. Photographs and examinations for the scores were taken at the time of the follow-up visit, 1-4 years after placement of the crowns. The number of treatment appointments required was recorded and the modified pink esthetic score (PES) was determined. Additionally, the functional implant prosthetic score (FIPS) was measured. The mean PES was 12.15/14 for the digital workflow and 11.95/14 for the analog workflow. The most common deficit was incomplete papillae for both workflows. Three treatment appointments were required for both workflows: (1) Scan and/or impressions making and patient consent, (2) implant placement, and (3) second-stage surgery with crown insertion. The FIPS was 9.1/10 for the digital workflow group and 9.2 /10 for the analog workflow group. Common deficits presented as missing papillae as well as open approximal contacts. The FIPS was not significantly different between workflows (p = 0.679). The PES also did not show a statistically significant difference for both workflows (p = 0.654), however the analog workflow showed better values for the papillae (p < 0.05). A significant difference was also found in the other PES values, with the digital workflow showing better results here (p < 0.05). A chronological analysis of the results of the digital technique showed that the cases treated last had significantly better values than the cases treated first. According to the results of this study, both workflows allowed placement of the definitive crowns on single-tooth implants during second-stage surgery. Both workflows were found to be equivalent in terms of esthetic results in this study, although the digital workflow demonstrated a learning curve. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.

The Cortical Shield for Facial Bone Reconstruction of Severely Damaged Sockets with Simultaneous Implant Placement: A Feasibility Clinical Trial.

To evaluate a novel proof-of-principle technique of simultaneous bone regeneration and implant placement in severely damaged sockets. This study consisted of patients who required a single implant and presented with severe facial bone loss. Individuals were randomly assigned to either the immediate or delayed implant placement protocol. Socket reconstruction and simultaneous implant placement were performed through periosteal-guided bone regeneration. Implants were encased in a customized shield of autogenous cortical bone harvested from an adjacent site. Re-entry surgery was performed at 12 to 18 weeks. Peri-implant tissues and pink esthetics were assessed following established success criteria. Of the 34 patients treated, 28 patients-consisting of 15 women and 13 men with an average age of 50.8 ± 4.5 years-continued to the final follow-up. All individuals showed new facial cortical bone regeneration at second-stage implant surgery after an average healing time of 14.9 ± 2.2 weeks (range: 12 to 18 weeks). Implants remained stable after loading. Success rates were 100% at 12 months. Mean pink esthetic score (PES) was 7.8 ± 1.2 (range: 6 to 9 on a scale of 0 to 10). Linear regression analysis showed that provisionalization and attachment loss are independent risk factors affecting pink esthetics (P < .01). Mild and moderate/severe attachment loss decrease pink esthetic scores by 0.9 and 1.7 points, respectively (95% CI: 0.2-1.5; P < .01). The use of provisional restorations improves pink esthetic scores by 1.6 points (95% CI: 0.8-2.4; P < .001). A PES > 7 was four and five times more likely to be expected for delay and immediate implants, respectively, if the implant had a provisional restoration delivered post-second-stage (RR = 4 to 5; 95% CI: 1-31; P = .07; P = .02). Cramér's V test showed a strong association between lack of implant provisionals and low pink esthetic scores (≤ 7, value = 0.7; P = .02). Facial implant transparency at follow-up was absent, and all implants had a band of keratinized tissue > 2 mm. Facial bone regeneration and simultaneous implant placement is feasible in severely damaged sockets through periosteal-guided bone regeneration after a short healing period following immediate or delayed protocols. The assisted regenerated intrasocket bone allows for functional implant stability. Adjacent tooth attachment loss and lack of implant provisionalization negatively impacts pink esthetics. The proposed approach decreases costs, morbidity, and treatment duration and eliminates the need for multi-stage approaches.

Evaluation of soft tissue and labial plate of bone stability with immediate implant in direct contact versus gap with socket shield: A randomized clinical trial with 1 year follow-up.

In the anterior region, the resorption of the buccal plate of bone after tooth extraction leads to contraction of the overlying soft tissues, resulting in an esthetic problem. In the socket shield technique, the buccal root section of the tooth is maintained, to preserve the buccal bone for immediate implant placement. The aim of this randomized clinical trial was to investigate the effect of leaving a gap or not between implant and retained root fragment on bone dimensions and soft tissue esthetics. This was a two armed parallel group randomized clinical trial with allocation ratio 1:1. Patients were eligible in case they needed immediate implant replacing teeth in esthetic zone with sufficient buccal bone support. CBCT was performed immediately after the intervention and 12 months later. Forty six patients (26 females and 20 males) were enrolled in the study with 23 of them placed in contact with shield and 23 were placed palatal leaving a gap to graft with a xenograft. After 12 months, excellent soft tissue stability was reported (mean pink esthetic score at placement group A: 12.00 ± 1.60 after 12 months 12.90 ± 1.69, group B 12.62 ± 2.07 and after 12 months 12.38 ± 2.20) Using both surgical techniques. Radiographic crestal bone level changes mean for group A was -0.26 ± 0.52 and for group B -0.34 ± 0.31. There was a strong positive correlation between clinical and radiographic bone width values which was statistically significant (r=0.782, p < 0.001). Width and thickness of keratinized gingiva showed no significant difference between values measured in both groups. Nonsignificant difference between studied groups according to the labial plate of bone clinical and radiographic changes after immediate implantation. Within the limitations of this study, the present data seem to support that the clinical outcome of the socket shield technique with immediate implant placement placed in contact or leaving a gap gave excellent esthetic results.

Success and patient satisfaction of immediately loaded zirconia implants with fixed restorations one year after loading

BackgroundThere is limited evidence for the use of zirconium dioxide implants in immediate implant placement as well as for related immediate loading protocols. The aim of this retrospective study was to investigate the survival rate, success and patient satisfaction of immediately placed zirconia implants compared to delayed placed implants.MethodsThe study included 58 partially edentulous patients who were treated between 2013 and 2015 with immediate and delayed transgingival healing zirconium dioxide implants (SDS, Kreuzlingen/ Switzerland). In addition to survival and success rate, marginal bone loss was assessed using radiographs and soft tissue was evaluated using Pink Esthetic Score. Oral health-related quality of life was investigated prospectively using a modified OHIP questionnaire.ResultsThe cumulative survival rate of all implants included was 92% with 88% classified as full success. No significant difference was found between the bone levels of immediately and delayed placed and immediately and delayed loaded implants. The mean Pink Esthetic Score after final prosthetic rehabilitation was 12.2/14 points indicating excellent esthetic clinical results. Analysis of the OHIP questionnaire showed a mean value of 0.54/100 points reflecting a high patient satisfaction.ConclusionsImmediate and delayed placed as well as loaded zirconium dioxide implants showed excellent results regarding implant success and survival in this study. Zirconium dioxide implants may ensure excellent esthetic results and high patient satisfaction.

Prospective evaluation of socket shield technique for immediate implant placement in anterior maxilla

Purpose: The purpose of the study was to report the four year implant survival rate for immediate implant placement using socket shield technique. Objectives included evaluation of the esthetic outcomes and to report any complications associated with this technique. Material and methods: This study is a prospective cohort of 10 consecutive patients with Implant placement between the maxillary first premolars using socket shield technique. Data were collected (PPD, BOP, PES, buccal width of keratinized mucosa, peri-apical radiographs and photographs) to assess and compare the changes in peri-implant tissues in pre-operative and follow up visits. Results: All the implants osseointegrated successfully without any adverse events. Peri-implant probing revealed healthy conditions in terms of pocket depth and bleeding on probing. Mean buccal width of keratinized mucosa of 4.1 was achieved. A mean pink aesthetic score of 12.3 was recorded. Conclusion: Within the limitations of this study, the results were suggesting that socket shield technique is effective in maintaining the hard and soft tissue architecture of anterior maxillary region and delivers high esthetic outcomes with shorter duration of treatment period. However, a prospective randomized study to compare socket shield with other techniques is needed to draw any definitive conclusion.

Failure Rate, Marginal Bone Loss, and Pink Esthetic with Socket-Shield Technique for Immediate Dental Implant Placement in the Esthetic Zone. A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Simple SummaryThe socket-shield technique has been proposed for preserving the bone ridge and surrounding soft tissues with immediate implantation in the extraction socket, maintaining the buccal wall fragment of the dental root. However, the socket-shield technique has not been compared with the conventional technique for immediate dental implant placement in the esthetic zone regarding the failure rate, marginal bone loss, and pink esthetic. Therefore, it is necessary to develop a systematic review and meta-analysis that provides evidence associated with the prognosis when using the socket-shield technique compared to the conventional technique.Aim: To compare the failure rate, marginal bone loss, and pink esthetic for the socket-shield technique and the conventional technique for immediate dental implant placement in the esthetic zone. Material and methods: A systematic literature review and meta-analysis, based on the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) recommendations, of clinical studies that evaluated the failure rate, marginal bone loss, and pink esthetic with the socket-shield technique for immediate dental implant placement in the esthetic zone was performed. A total of 4 databases were consulted in the literature search: PubMed-MEDLINE, Scopus, Embase, and Web of Science. After eliminating duplicated articles and applying the inclusion criteria, 16 articles were selected for the qualitative and quantitative analysis. Results: Four randomized controlled trials, five prospective clinical studies, four retrospective studies, and three case series were included in the meta-analysis. The dental implant failure rate for the socket-shield technique for immediate dental implant placement was 1.37% (95% CI, 0.21–2.54%); however, no statistically significant differences between the conventional and socket-shield technique were found. The estimated mean difference in the marginal bone loss for the socket-shield technique was −0.5 mm (95% CI, −0.82 to −0.18) and statistically significant (p < 0.01), with a high heterogeneity (I2 = 99%). The mean pink esthetic score was 12.27 (Q test = 4.47; p-value = 0.61; I2 = 0%). The difference in pink esthetic between the conventional (n = 55) and socket-shield techniques (n = 55) for immediate dental implant placement was 1.15 (95% CI, 0.73–1.58; Q test = 8.88; p value = 0.11; I2 = 44%). The follow-up time was found to be significant (beta coefficient = 0.023; R2 = 85.6%; QM = 3.82; p = 0.049) for the PES for the socket-shield technique. Conclusions: Within the limitations of this systematic review with meta-analysis, the dental implant failure rate did not differ between the socket-shield technique and conventional technique for immediate implant placement in the esthetic zone. However, a lower marginal bone loss and higher pink esthetic scores were found for the socket-shield technique compared to the conventional technique.

A Pilot Study of Small-Diameter One-Piece Ceramic Implants Placed in Anterior Regions: Clinical and Esthetic Outcomes at 1-Year Follow-up.

The aim of this study was to evaluate the clinical, esthetic, and patient-reported outcomes of one-piece zirconia implants placed in incisal areas using digital surgical templates after 1 year of follow-up. Patients who had lost an anterior tooth received a 3.3-mm-diameter zirconia implant placed by computer-guided surgery. Implant survival and soft tissue conditions were assessed periodically 1 week, 3 months, 6 months, and 1 year after loading. Standardized radiographs were taken at definitive prosthesis insertion and 1 year postloading to evaluate peri-implant bone loss. Additionally, the esthetic outcomes and patient-reported outcomes were also investigated. Twenty zirconia implants were placed in 20 patients with no implants lost, resulting in 100% survival rates. A minor change in the mean marginal bone level (0.14 ± 0.87 mm) was found between definitive prosthetic loading and 12 months later. Peri-implant soft tissue remained stable throughout the observation period. The mean Pink Esthetic Score and White Esthetic Score were 12.05 and 8.60, respectively, while the mean Gingival Papilla Index scores were 1.55 at the mesial papilla and 1.65 at the distal papilla at the 1-year follow-up. The mean visual analog scale scores for patient perception of the overall process, speech, mastication, and esthetics were 93.3 ± 7.8, 95.1 ± 5.3, 93.6 ± 7.6, and 94.5 ± 6.2 mm, respectively. For the 1-year results, 3.3-mm-diameter one-piece ceramic implants placed by computer-guided surgery showed favorable clinical performances with no failure when used for single-tooth replacement in anterior regions.

A Novel Method for Immediate Implant Placement in Defective Fresh Extraction Sites.

This study assessed a novel treatment protocol for immediate implant placement in defective fresh extraction sockets. A single-arm clinical study was conducted including 12 fresh extraction sockets divided into two groups: those with intact and those with a deficient facial plate of bone. Hopeless teeth were atraumatically extracted, a vestibular access horizontal incision was made 3 to 4 mm apical to the mucogingival junction, a mucoperiosteal tunnel was created from the labial orifice of the socket, a slowly resorbing membrane shield was stabilized under the tunnel, implants were placed using a surgical guide, and a subepithelial connective tissue graft was harvested and secured over the membrane shield. Definitive restorations were delivered at 3 months postoperatively. Cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) scans were taken at baseline and after 6 and 13 months to measure facial bone thickness and height. Pink esthetic score (PES) was recorded at 6 and 13 months. At 6 months, the mean ± SD facial bone thickness was 1.88 ± 0.73 mm for sockets with intact facial bone compared to 0.76 ± 0.42 at baseline and 2.34 ± 0.78 mm for sockets with deficient facial bone compared with 0 ± 0 at baseline, whereas at 13 months, the thickness was 1.84 ± 0.74 and 2.18 ± 0.73 mm, respectively. The facial bone crest coincided with the implant platform in sockets with an intact facial bone plate and those with a deficient facial bone plate at 6 months, whereas at 13 months, the distance for sockets with a deficient facial bone plate increased to 0.20 ± 0.13 mm. The mean PES at 6 and 13 months was 11.33 for both groups out of a maximum score of 14. The proposed technique provided a minimally invasive treatment with predictable esthetic outcome allowing immediate implant placement in sockets with intact and with deficient facial plates.

Clinical Outcomes of Maxillary Anterior Postextraction Socket Implants with Immediate Provisional Restorations Using a Novel Macro-Hybrid Implant Design: An 18- to 24-Month Single-Cohort Prospective Study.

Extraction and immediate implant placement/restoration in the esthetic zone is clinically challenging; benefits include fewer surgical appointments and maintenance of peri-implant soft tissues throughout the treatment period, and limitations include gingival recession and bone dehiscence during surgery. Macro-hybrid implants (large-diameter apical/narrow-diameter occlusal) were placed in 19 patients immediately following the extraction of hopeless maxillary anterior teeth. Immediate restorations were fabricated without occlusal contacts. Pre- and postplacement cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) scans were taken. Nineteen implants were available for recall 13 to 25 months postoperatively. The overall implant cumulative survival rate was 100% (range: 13 to 25 months, mean: 19 months), and mean insertion torque value was 65 Ncm. Mean Pink Esthetic Score was 12.63 at 6 months, and was 13 at the 18- to 24-month follow-up. Mean mesial and distal tooth-to-implant distances immediately after implant placement were 2.55 ± 1.29 mm and 2.29 ± 0.82 mm, respectively. Interproximal bone crest width, distance, and height were maintained at implant platforms, mesially and distally, 18 to 24 months postoperative. The results of this study indicated that the macro-hybrid implant geometry for this immediate surgical/restorative protocol provided excellent and stable 2-year results relative to implant survival (100%), labial plate thickness via CBCT evaluations, tooth-to-implant distances immediately post-implant placement, PES, and interproximal bone crest width, distance, and heights, which were maintained at the implant platforms.

Esthetics and Patient-Reported Outcomes of Implants Placed with Guided Bone Regeneration and Complete Native Bone: A Prospective Controlled Clinical Trial.

When encountering a buccal bone defect during implant placement, guided bone regeneration (GBR) is a well-accepted method for bone reconstruction. However, it is still unclear if the esthetic and patient-reported outcomes are comparable to implants placed in native bone. The purpose of this prospective trial was to compare implants placed with a GBR procedure for a small (≤ 4 mm) buccal defect with implants placed completely in native bone (control). Patients were allocated to the GBR group or control group during implant placement in the esthetic zone. Implants were placed after at least 12 weeks of healing of the extraction sockets. A buccal bone defect of ≤ 4 mm resulted in allocation to the GBR group. Follow-up was performed until 12 months after loading. Outcome measurements were as follows: esthetic scores, patient-reported outcome measurements, implant survival and complications, clinical indices, and radiographic measurements. In total, 45 patients were included, of which 23 underwent a GBR procedure after implant placement, and in 22 patients no GBR was necessary. No significant differences in esthetic outcomes were seen between the two groups. At the final follow-up, a mean pink esthetic score (PES) of 7.8 (SD: 1.5) was seen for the GBR group and 8.4 (SD: 1.4) for the control group. Regarding the white esthetic score (WES), a mean of 9.1 (SD: 1.0) was found for both groups. Patients of both groups were equally satisfied with their mucosa and crown. A mean visual analog score (VAS) for the soft tissues of 8.6 (SD: 1.0) in the GBR group and 8.8 (SD: 0.9) for the control group was noted. A mean VAS of 9.2 (SD: 0.8) was noted for the crown in the GBR group and 8.6 (SD: 2.0) in the control group. Implant survival was 100%, and there were no significant differences in complications, plaque/bleeding/gingiva indices, width of attached mucosa, and marginal bone loss. Implants placed in the esthetic zone with GBR or complete native bone coverage showed successful esthetic outcomes and satisfied patients with predictable clinical and radiographic parameters after more than 1 year of loading. Within the limits of this study, GBR for a small buccal bone defect seems to be a reliable technique with good esthetics and patient-reported outcomes.

Comparative clinical evaluation of esthetic parameters of immediately provisionalized implants in the esthetic zone with their natural counterparts

Background: An anterior single implant-supported crown restoration in the maxillary anterior region must meet a particularly high standard of esthetic quality. The standard of care for edentulous space in esthetic zone therefore would be the placement of an implant with immediate provisionalization. Aims and Objecectives: The aim of this study is to evaluate the esthetic parameters of immediately provisionalized implants in the esthetic zone and compare patients opinion with blinded clinicians opinion of the outcome of esthetics of implant in esthtic zone. Materials and Methods: In our study, we placed 10 maxillary anterior single-tooth implants in fully healed maxillary anterior sites in esthetic zone. All the implants were provisionalized within 24 hours. Zirconia prosthesis was delivered as definitive prosthesis after three months of implant placement. The esthetic zone was photographed three months after delivering the definitive prosthesis. The esthetic outcome was then evaluated objectively using Pink Esthetic Score (PES) and White Esthetic Score (WES) by a blinded clinician. In addition, we used a triple score technique Visual Analogue Scale(VAS) wherein the patients commented on the soft tissue, prosthetic as well as the overall esthetic outcome. Results: A mean PES of 9.2± 1.03 and a mean WES of 8.7± 1.16 recorded showed an acceptable peri-implant soft tissue outcome and an acceptable prosthetic outcome respectively. The statistical analysis revealed statistically significant correlation between patients' esthetic perception and dentists' perception of the anterior tooth. Conclusion: The PES/WES is an objective tool in rating the esthetics of implant supported single crowns and adjacent soft tissues. Orthodontists were the most critical observers, while periodontists were more generous than other observers. The statistical analysis revealed a statistically significant correlation between patients' esthetic perception and dentists' perception of the anterior tooth.

Impact of 0.5 mm vs 1.5 mm subcrestal implant placement on marginal bone loss and aesthetics ‐ 3‐year results of a multicenter RCT

Background Among the legends circulating in implant dentistry there is the belief that aesthetics can be improved by placing implants in a subcrestal position.In literature, there are only a few RCT evaluating the differences between crestal and subcrestal placement and their main outcome is limited to short term bone loss.The influence of implant depth in subcrestal placement on the mid-long term esthetic and biological outcomes remains poorly investigated, especially in conical connection implant. Aim/Hypothesis To evaluate if the placement of single dental implants either 0.5 or 1.5 mm subcrestally in healed bone crests has an impact on long term esthetic and biological outcomes. Material and Methods Sixty partially edentulous patients requiring two single implant-supported crowns were recruited from six centres. According to a split-mouth design , the two sites were randomly allocated either to 0.5 mm or 1.5 mm subcrestal implant placement. During the healing period of 3 months, surgical sites in aesthetic areas were closed while a one-stage approach with transgingival healing screw was followed in non-aesthetic areas . Provisional acrylic crowns were delivered and were replaced after 2 months by definitive metal-ceramic crowns. Patients were followed to 3 years after loading. Outcome measures were- crown and implant failures, complications, aesthetics assessed using the pink esthetic score (PES), peri-implant marginal bone level changes, and patient preference, recorded by blinded assessors. Results At delivery of definitive crowns, 2 months after loading, the mean pink aesthetic score was 11.2 ± 1.9 and 11.1 ± 1.5 for the 0.5 and 1.5 mm group, respectively. At 3 years after loading, the mean pink aesthetic score was 12 ± 1.9 and 12.2 ± 1.8 for the 0.5 and 1.5 mm group, respectively. There were no statistically significant differences between the two groups at 2 months (P = 0.626), at 1 year (P = 0.920) or at 3 years (P = 0.296). Three years after loading, patients of the 0.5 mm group lost on average 0.34 ± 0.87 mm and those of the 1.5 mm group 0.19 ± 0.54 mm, the difference being statistically significant (difference = 0.15 mm; 95% CI 0.00 to 0.30; P = 0.046). The implant placement was not reflected in patient preference. There were no differences in outcomes among centres. Conclusion and clinical implications Both surgical protocols resulted in very high esthetic outcome (PES > 12) and minimal bone resorption (<0.5 mm) after 3 years. A slightly lower bone resorption was measured with 1.5 mm subcrestal placement compared to 0.5 mm, with no impact on the esthetic score. This tends to show that deeper implant placement might be beneficial only regarding bone stability, which will be confirmed after 5 years of follow-up.

Clinical outcomes of using a prosthetic protocol to rehabilitate tissue-level implants with a convergent collar in the esthetic zone: A 3-year prospective study

Statement of problemWhether increasing the space for peri-implant soft tissues by using implant systems with conical or convergent transmucosal components would improve tissue stability and esthetics is unclear. PurposeThe purpose of this prospective clinical study was to evaluate the clinical and esthetic outcomes of using tissue-level implants with a convergent collar in the esthetic zone that had been rehabilitated following the biological oriented preparation technique (BOPT) approach after a 3-year follow-up period. Material and methodsSixteen participants with at least 1 nonrestorable tooth in the maxillary anterior region or with congenitally missing maxillary lateral incisors were enrolled, and tissue-level implants with a convergent collar were inserted 3 months after extraction. The implants were restored with cemented single crowns designed according to the BOPT protocol. Bone resorption and the pink esthetic score were evaluated over a 3-year period. ResultsFifteen participants (mean age: 54.6 years) were evaluated over the 3-year period (total: 16 implants). One participant with 1 implant relocated dropped out of the study. The 3-year implant cumulative survival rate was 100%. The mean ±standard deviation bone-level change was 0.071 ±0.11 mm. The mean pink esthetic score was 8.5 ±1.59, range 4-10. ConclusionsThe use of the BOPT protocol to restore tissue-level implants with a convergent collar achieved good esthetic results and maintained stable soft and hard peri-implant tissues.

Effect of Simultaneous Immediate Implant Placement and Guided Bone Reconstruction with Ultra-Fine Titanium Mesh Membranes on Radiographic and Clinical Parameters after 18 Months of Loading.

Background: The aim of the present prospective case series study was to evaluate the implant and prosthetic survival rates, complications and marginal bone loss using ultra-fine titanium mesh membrane with simultaneous implant placement, to provide space maintenance mandatory for guided bone reconstruction of alveolar bone defects. Materials and Methods: patients were recruited and treated at a private clinic in Rome, Italy, between March 2016 and October 2017. Self-tapping tapered implants were placed through a computer-guided template-assisted approach. Autogenous bone was placed alone over the exposed implant surface, then mixed with inorganic bovine bone material. Finally, the membrane was connected and shaped in order to securely enclose the graft area, and the healing cap was connected and screwed onto the height connector. Outcome measures were: implant and prosthetic failure, biological and mechanical complications, marginal and volumetric bone level changes, esthetic evaluation performed according to the pink aesthetic score (PES). Results: in total, seven patients (five women, two men) with a mean age of 52.7 ± 20.3 years (range: 27–71) received 10 self-tapping tapered implants and simultaneous guided bone regeneration with ultra-fine titanium mesh membranes. No implants and no prostheses failed during the entire follow-up period. One slightly membrane exposure was observed one month after implant placement in one patient. The mean marginal bone loss (MBL) at implant loading was 0.13 ± 0.09 mm (95% CI 0.08–0.19). At the 18-month follow-up examination, the mean MBL was 0.28 ± 0.33 mm (95% CI 0.07–0.50) The difference was not statistically significant (0.15 ± 0.31; 95% CI 0.05–0.35; P = 0.1888). The mean horizontal alveolar ridge width was 3.72 ± 1.08 mm (95% CI 3.22–4.22 mm). At the II-stage surgery, the mean bone width was 8.79 ± 0.98 mm (95% CI 8.51–9.07 mm). The mean bone gain was 5.06 ± 1.13 mm (95% CI 4.68–5.44 mm; P = 0.000). The mean volume of the grafted bone calculated using the superimposition technique was 0.99 ± 0.38 CC (95% CI 0.75–1.23 CC). The mean PES at implant loading was 8.2 ± 0.8 mm (95% CI 7.7–8.7). At the 18-month follow-up examination, the mean PES was 12.0 ± 0.7 mm (95% CI 11.5–12.5) The difference was statistically significant (3.8 ± 0.4; 95% CI 3.5–4.1; P = 0.0000); Conclusion: with the limitation of the present prospective study, the guided bone reconstruction using an ultra-fine titanium mesh membrane with simultaneous implant placement seems to provide good and stable results in implant/prosthesis success. Further research with a longer follow-up and a higher sample size are needed to confirm the results from this preliminary report.

Maxillary Sinus Floor Augmentation With Autogenous Bone Graft From the Ascending Mandibular Ramus.

The objective of the present study was to assess patient satisfaction and esthetic implant outcome 10 years after maxillary sinus floor augmentation with autogenous bone graft from the mandibular ramus. Maxillary sinus floor augmentation with autogenous bone graft from the mandibular ramus was conducted in 48 consecutive patients from 2002 to 2006. Records and radiographs were retrospectively analyzed. Twenty-four patients including 34 sinus augmentation procedures and 37 implants were evaluated after 10 years. Subjective and professional evaluations of the final periimplant soft tissue, implant crown, and total implant treatment were conducted. The 10-year survival of suprastructures and implants was 84% and 100%, respectively. The patients were highly satisfied with the esthetic and implant treatment outcome expressed by scores >90 on the visual analog scale. Most implants were characterized by scores of 1 or 2, resulting in a mean pink esthetic score of 9 (maximum 14) and a white esthetic score of 8 (maximum 10). Maxillary sinus floor augmentation with autogenous bone graft is characterized by high long-term implant survival rate and patient satisfaction.