Immediate provisionalization of dental implants in grafted alveolar ridges in the esthetic zone: a 5-year evaluation.

This clinical study assessed at 5 years both implant survival and peri-implant tissue architecture of immediately provisionalized implants placed 4 to 6 months following augmentation with demineralized bovine bone allograft and collagen membrane. Of 23 implants in 19 patients, one implant failed prior to loading (95.6% survival). Implant tissue relationships were stable following implant placement; marginal bone level changes from implant placement to 5 years (mean ± SD: -0.18 ± 0.79 mm, range: -1.6 to 1.4 mm, P = .51), the mesial and distal papilla length changes (mesial mean ± SD: 1.14 ± 0.92 mm, P < .001; distal mean ± SD: 0.74 ± 1.46 mm, P = .04), and the unchanged mucosal zenith location (mean ± SD: 0.24 ± 0.93 mm, P = .15) were recorded. There were no major surgical complications during the 5-year period. When augmentation is required, subsequent dental implant placement in the anterior maxilla may be achieved using immediate placement and provisionalization protocol to attain osseointegration success and stable peri-implant tissue responses.

Immediate provisionalization of dental implants placed in healed alveolar ridges and extraction sockets: a 5-year prospective evaluation.

PURPOSE: This 5-year prospective multicenter study compared implant survival and success, peri-implant health and soft tissue responses, crestal bone level stability, and complication rates following immediate loading of single OsseoSpeed implants placed in anterior maxillary healed ridges or extraction sockets. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Individuals requiring anterior tooth replacement with single implants were treated and immediately provisionalized. Definitive all-ceramic crowns were placed at 12 weeks. Implant survival, bone levels, soft tissue levels, and peri-implant health were monitored for 5 years. RESULTS: One hundred thirteen patients received implants in fresh sockets (55) and healed ridges (58). After 5 years, 45 and 49 patients remained for evaluation, respectively. During the first year, three implants failed in the extraction socket group (94.6% survival) and one implant failed in the healed ridge group (98.3% survival); this difference was not significant. No further implant failures were recorded. After 5 years, the interproximal crestal bone levels were located a mean of 0.43 ± 0.63 mm and 0.38 ± 0.62 mm from the reference points of implants in sockets and healed ridges (not a significant difference). In both groups, papillae increased over time and peri-implant mucosal zenith positions were stable from the time of definitive crown placement in sockets and healed ridges. Compared to flap surgery for implants in healed ridges, flapless surgery resulted in increased peri-implant mucosal tissue dimension (average, 0.78 ± 1.34 mm vs 0.19 ± 0.79 mm). CONCLUSION: After 5 years, the bone and soft tissue parameters that characterize implant success and contribute to dental implant esthetics were similar following the immediate provisionalization of implants in sockets and healed ridges. The overall tissue responses and reported implant survival support the immediate provisionalization of dental implants in situations involving healed ridges and, under ideal circumstances, extraction sockets.

Comparison of radiographic and clinical outcomes following immediate provisionalization of single-tooth dental implants placed in healed alveolar ridges and extraction sockets.

PURPOSE: The primary goal of this study was to compare implant survival 12 months after immediate loading of single implants placed in healed ridges versus extraction sockets. Secondary outcomes were to compare marginal bone adaptation and soft tissue changes over time. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A prospective multicenter clinical investigation was initiated to assess clinical performance of immediately loaded implants in the maxilla. Implant survival was ascertained at the time of impression making (8 to 10 weeks) and after 1 year by clinical stability. Radiographic marginal bone levels, soft tissue levels, and plaque and bleeding scores were compared with baseline values (implant placement and provisionalization). RESULTS: One hundred thirty-nine patients received 157 implants in the maxilla. Single implants with provisional crowns were placed in extraction sockets of 55 patients (58 implants) and in healed ridges of 60 patients (65 implants). In addition, 19 patients (23 implants) required bone grafting prior to implant placement, and 11 implants in 10 patients among all groups were not immediately loaded because of insufficient initial stability after surgery. Three implants (5.2%) failed in extraction sites and one implant (1.5%) failed in a healed ridge. The mean change in marginal bone level 1 year after implant placement was 1.30 mm (SD 2.52) (gain) in extraction sockets and -0.40 mm (SD 1.43) (loss) in healed ridges. The mucosal zenith was stable or moved incisally following definitive crown placement in 83.7% of immediate implants and 87.0% of implants placed in healed ridges. Plaque and inflammation scores were low and did not differ between groups. CONCLUSIONS: The responses of local bone and soft tissues at immediately loaded implants placed in extraction sockets or healed ridges were similar. Furthermore, these 1-year results suggest that clinical management of esthetically critical soft tissue may be predictably achieved in both indications.