Immediate placement and provisionalization of implants in the aesthetic zone with or without a connective tissue graft: A 1-year randomized controlled trial and volumetric study

• Main Authors: Jung, R.E (Author), Meijer, H.J.A (Author), Mühlemann, S. (Author), Raghoebar, G.M (Author), van Nimwegen, W.G (Author), Zuiderveld, E.G (Author)
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Published: Blackwell Munksgaard 2018
• Subjects: adult; Adult; aesthetic zone; aged; Aged; Aged, 80 and over; anatomy and histology; connective tissue; Connective Tissue; controlled study; Dental Implantation, Endosseous; dental procedure; Esthetics, Dental; female; Female; human; Humans; Immediate Dental Implant Loading; immediate placement; male; Male; medical photography; middle aged; Middle Aged; mouth mucosa; Mouth Mucosa; patient satisfaction; Patient Satisfaction; periodontal index; Periodontal Index; Photography, Dental; procedures; randomized controlled trial; soft tissue graft; surgery; tooth implantation; transplantation; very elderly; volumetric changes; young adult; Young Adult
• Online Access: View Fulltext in Publisher

 Objective: To volumetrically compare peri-implant mid-facial soft tissue changes in immediately placed and provisionalized implants in the aesthetic zone, with or without a connective tissue graft. Material and methods: Sixty patients were included. All implants were placed immediately after extraction. After randomization, in one group, a connective tissue graft (test group, n = 30) was inserted at the buccal aspect of the implant. The other group (control group, n = 30) received no connective tissue graft. Clinical parameters, digital photographs and conventional impressions were obtained before extraction (Tpre) and at 12 months following definitive crown placement (T12). The casts were digitized by a laboratory scanner, and a volumetric analysis was performed between Tpre and T12. Results: Twenty-five patients in each group were available for analysis at T12. Volumetric change, transformed to a mean (±SD) change in thickness, was −0.68 ± 0.59 mm (test) and −0.49 ± 0.54 mm (control) with a non-significant difference between groups (p =.189). The mid-facial mucosa level was significantly different between both groups (p =.014), with a mean (±SD) change of +0.20 ± 0.70 mm (test) and −0.48 ± 1.13 mm (control). The Pink Esthetic Score was similar between both groups. Conclusions: The use of a CTG in immediately placed and provisionalized implants in the aesthetic zone did not result in less mucosal volume loss after 12 months, leading to the assumption that a CTG cannot fully compensate for the underlying facial bone loss, although a significantly more coronally located mid-facial mucosa level was found when a CTG was performed. © 2018 John Wiley & Sons A/S. Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd