Soft-tissue esthetic outcome of single implants: Immediate placement in fresh extraction sockets versus conventional placement in healed sockets
Background: Immediate implant placement has advantages such as requiring fewer surgical procedures and decreased treatment time; however, unpredictable soft- and hard-tissue outcome is a problem. This study aimed to compare the soft-tissue esthetic outcome of single implants placed in fresh extracti...
Main Authors: | , , |
---|---|
Format: | Article |
Language: | English |
Published: |
Wolters Kluwer Medknow Publications
2018-01-01
|
Series: | Journal of Indian Society of Periodontology |
Subjects: | |
Online Access: | http://www.jisponline.com/article.asp?issn=0972-124X;year=2018;volume=22;issue=3;spage=249;epage=253;aulast=Pour |
id |
doaj-96f2b1b95f8545dcaf84e79007e49c81 |
---|---|
record_format |
Article |
spelling |
doaj-96f2b1b95f8545dcaf84e79007e49c812020-11-24T22:33:31ZengWolters Kluwer Medknow PublicationsJournal of Indian Society of Periodontology0972-124X2018-01-0122324925310.4103/jisp.jisp_21_18Soft-tissue esthetic outcome of single implants: Immediate placement in fresh extraction sockets versus conventional placement in healed socketsNima Naddaf PourBaharak GhaediMona SohrabiBackground: Immediate implant placement has advantages such as requiring fewer surgical procedures and decreased treatment time; however, unpredictable soft- and hard-tissue outcome is a problem. This study aimed to compare the soft-tissue esthetic outcome of single implants placed in fresh extraction sockets versus those placed in healed sockets. Materials and Methods: This cross-sectional, retrospective study was performed on 42 patients who received single implants. Twenty-two patients with a mean age of 40.14 years received immediate implants while 18 patients with a mean age of 43.40 years were subjected to conventional (delayed) implant placement. The mean follow-up time was 14.42 ± 8.37 months and 18.25 ± 7.10 months in the immediate and conventional groups, respectively. Outcome assessments included clinical and radiographic examinations. The esthetic outcome was objectively rated using the pink esthetic score (PES). Results: All implants fulfilled the success criteria. The mean PES was 8.54 ± 1.26 and 8.10 ± 1.65 in the immediate and conventional groups, respectively. This difference was not statistically significant (P = 0.329). The two PES parameters, namely, the facial mucosa curvature and facial mucosa level had the highest percentage of complete score. Conclusions: Immediate and conventional single implant treatments yielded comparable esthetic outcomes.http://www.jisponline.com/article.asp?issn=0972-124X;year=2018;volume=22;issue=3;spage=249;epage=253;aulast=PourEstheticsimmediate implant placementpink esthetic scoresingle implant |
collection |
DOAJ |
language |
English |
format |
Article |
sources |
DOAJ |
author |
Nima Naddaf Pour Baharak Ghaedi Mona Sohrabi |
spellingShingle |
Nima Naddaf Pour Baharak Ghaedi Mona Sohrabi Soft-tissue esthetic outcome of single implants: Immediate placement in fresh extraction sockets versus conventional placement in healed sockets Journal of Indian Society of Periodontology Esthetics immediate implant placement pink esthetic score single implant |
author_facet |
Nima Naddaf Pour Baharak Ghaedi Mona Sohrabi |
author_sort |
Nima Naddaf Pour |
title |
Soft-tissue esthetic outcome of single implants: Immediate placement in fresh extraction sockets versus conventional placement in healed sockets |
title_short |
Soft-tissue esthetic outcome of single implants: Immediate placement in fresh extraction sockets versus conventional placement in healed sockets |
title_full |
Soft-tissue esthetic outcome of single implants: Immediate placement in fresh extraction sockets versus conventional placement in healed sockets |
title_fullStr |
Soft-tissue esthetic outcome of single implants: Immediate placement in fresh extraction sockets versus conventional placement in healed sockets |
title_full_unstemmed |
Soft-tissue esthetic outcome of single implants: Immediate placement in fresh extraction sockets versus conventional placement in healed sockets |
title_sort |
soft-tissue esthetic outcome of single implants: immediate placement in fresh extraction sockets versus conventional placement in healed sockets |
publisher |
Wolters Kluwer Medknow Publications |
series |
Journal of Indian Society of Periodontology |
issn |
0972-124X |
publishDate |
2018-01-01 |
description |
Background: Immediate implant placement has advantages such as requiring fewer surgical procedures and decreased treatment time; however, unpredictable soft- and hard-tissue outcome is a problem. This study aimed to compare the soft-tissue esthetic outcome of single implants placed in fresh extraction sockets versus those placed in healed sockets. Materials and Methods: This cross-sectional, retrospective study was performed on 42 patients who received single implants. Twenty-two patients with a mean age of 40.14 years received immediate implants while 18 patients with a mean age of 43.40 years were subjected to conventional (delayed) implant placement. The mean follow-up time was 14.42 ± 8.37 months and 18.25 ± 7.10 months in the immediate and conventional groups, respectively. Outcome assessments included clinical and radiographic examinations. The esthetic outcome was objectively rated using the pink esthetic score (PES). Results: All implants fulfilled the success criteria. The mean PES was 8.54 ± 1.26 and 8.10 ± 1.65 in the immediate and conventional groups, respectively. This difference was not statistically significant (P = 0.329). The two PES parameters, namely, the facial mucosa curvature and facial mucosa level had the highest percentage of complete score. Conclusions: Immediate and conventional single implant treatments yielded comparable esthetic outcomes. |
topic |
Esthetics immediate implant placement pink esthetic score single implant |
url |
http://www.jisponline.com/article.asp?issn=0972-124X;year=2018;volume=22;issue=3;spage=249;epage=253;aulast=Pour |
work_keys_str_mv |
AT nimanaddafpour softtissueestheticoutcomeofsingleimplantsimmediateplacementinfreshextractionsocketsversusconventionalplacementinhealedsockets AT baharakghaedi softtissueestheticoutcomeofsingleimplantsimmediateplacementinfreshextractionsocketsversusconventionalplacementinhealedsockets AT monasohrabi softtissueestheticoutcomeofsingleimplantsimmediateplacementinfreshextractionsocketsversusconventionalplacementinhealedsockets |
_version_ |
1725730632100741120 |