Premium
Esthetic Assessment of Implants Placed into Fresh Extraction Sockets for Single‐Tooth Replacements Using a Flapless Approach
Author(s) -
Kolerman Roni,
Mijiritsky Eitan,
Barnea Eitan,
Dabaja Areeje,
Nissan Joseph,
Tal Haim
Publication year - 2017
Publication title -
clinical implant dentistry and related research
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 1.338
H-Index - 85
eISSN - 1708-8208
pISSN - 1523-0899
DOI - 10.1111/cid.12458
Subject(s) - medicine , dentistry , soft tissue , implant , osseointegration , orthodontics , maxilla , buccal administration , periodontitis , anterior maxilla , chronic periodontitis , major duodenal papilla , surgery
Background To validate the concept of immediate implant placement and nonfunctional loading for use in the esthetically sensitive anterior maxilla, clinical trials should ideally include objective esthetic criteria. Purpose This study analyzed procedural results as graded by the pink esthetic score and white esthetic score (PES/WES). Methods Thirty‐nine suitable patients (mean follow‐up 44.82 ± 28 months) were evaluated. Results Thirty‐eight implants fulfilled stringent criteria for successful osseointegration: absence of peri‐implant radiolucency, implant mobility, suppuration, and pain. The mean total PES/WES was 15.50 ± 2.67 (range: 10–20). The mean total PES of 7.92 ± 1.60 (range: 5–10) indicated favorable overall peri‐implant soft‐tissue conditions. Root convexity and texture (1.63 ± 0.54) and curvature of the facial mucosa (1.68 ± 0.47) and distal papilla (1.66 ± 0.48) had the highest mean values, whereas acceptable levels of facial tissue (1.53 ± 0.73) and mesial papilla (1.42 ± 0.64) were the most difficult to fully achieve. The mean mesial and distal bone loss at data collection was, was 1.19 ± 0.54 and 1.15 ± 0.51, respectively. Periodontal disease severity (advanced chronic and aggressive periodontitis) was significantly associated with a low total PES ( p = .048). Conclusions Objective PES/WES assessment validated immediate anterior maxillary single‐tooth replacement and restoration as being a successful and esthetically predictable treatment modality in sites where the buccal bone had been preserved during the extraction at 1 year of follow‐up.