Premium
Connective tissue grafts in conjunction with implants installed immediately into extraction sockets. An experimental study in dogs
Author(s) -
Caneva Marco,
Botticelli Daniele,
Viganò Paolo,
Morelli Fabrizio,
Rea Massimiliano,
Lang Niklaus P.
Publication year - 2013
Publication title -
clinical oral implants research
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 2.407
H-Index - 161
eISSN - 1600-0501
pISSN - 0905-7161
DOI - 10.1111/j.1600-0501.2012.02450.x
Subject(s) - connective tissue , buccal administration , dentistry , hard tissue , soft tissue , premolar , medicine , coronal plane , implant , resorption , anatomy , surgery , molar , pathology
Aim To evaluate the influence of a sub‐epithelial connective tissue graft placed at the buccal aspect of implants installed immediately after tooth extraction on the dimensional changes of hard and soft tissues. Materials and Methods In six Labrador dogs a bilateral partial‐ thickness dissection was made buccal to the second mandibular premolar. At the lingual aspect, full‐thickness flaps were elevated. The teeth were extracted and implants installed immediately into the distal socket. A connective tissue graft was obtained from the palate and applied to the buccal aspect of the test sites, whereas contra‐laterally, no graft was applied. The flaps were sutured to allow a non‐submerged installation. After 4 months of healing, the animals were sacrificed, ground sections were obtained and histomorphometric analyses were performed. Results After 4 months of healing, all implants were integrated ( n = 6). Both at the test and at the control sites bone resorption occurred: 1.6 mm and 2.1 mm, respectively. The difference was not statistically significant. The coronal aspect of the peri‐implant soft tissue was wider and located more coronally at the test compared with the control sites. The differences were statistically significant. Conclusions The application of a connective tissue graft placed at the buccal aspect of the bony wall at implants installed immediately after tooth extraction yielded a minimal preservation of the hard tissues. The peri‐implant mucosa, however, was significantly thicker and more coronally positioned at the test compared with the control sites.