Smile esthetic evaluation of mucogingival reconstructive surgery

To assess the difference in smile esthetic impact of Coronally Advanced Flap (CAF) with or without the adjunct of a collagen matrix (CMX) used as root coverage procedures. Subjects with esthetic demands showing multiple upper gingival recessions of at least 2 mm, without interproximal attachment loss and cervical abrasion no more than 1 mm were recruited and randomized to CAF plus CMX or CAF alone. The Smile Esthetic Index (SEI) was adopted to quantify the quality of the smile recorded at baseline and 12 months after treatment for each treatment group. In addition, between group difference in the SEI was calculated. 24 Patients were treated and analysed. At baseline, mean gingival recession depths were 2.3 ± 0.7 mm for Test group and 2.6 ± 1.0 mm for Control group. After 1 year, the residual recession depth was 0.3 ± 0.4 mm in the CAF + CMX group and 0.6 ± 0.3 mm in the control group. The SEI at baseline was 8.1 ± 1.0 and 7.9 ± 0.7 for Test and Control group, respectively. The between groups difference at 12 months in SEI was 0.4 (95% C.I. − 0.0 to 0.8, P = 0.0697). Twelve months after treatment, CAF + CMX provided a similar SEI compared to CAF alone and the adjunct of a collagen matrix did not show a different impact on the smile esthetic appearance

Natural or Palatal Positioning of Immediate Post-extraction Implants in the Aesthetic Zone? Five-year Outcomes of a Multicentre Randomised Controlled Trial

PURPOSE. To evaluate whether there is a difference in aesthetic outcomes when positioning immediate post-extractive implants in the “central” position (where the natural tooth would be in relation to adjacent teeth/implants) as opposed to roughly 3 mm more pala-tally. MATERIALS AND METHODS. Just after tooth extraction, 20 patients requiring one single immediate maxillary post-extraction implant, from second premolar to second premolar, were randomly allocated to receive one implant positioned in either the natural “central” position (central group; 10 patients), or about 3 mm more palatally (palatal group; 10 pa-tients) according to a parallel-group design at two different centres. When needed, sites were reconstructed, and bone-to-implant gaps were filled with granules of anorganic bovine bone and covered by resorbable collagen barriers. Implants were left submerged for 4 months and rehabilitated with provisional crowns, replaced after 4 months by definitive metal-ceramic crowns. Patients were followed up to 5 years after loading. Outcome measures were: crown and implant failures; complications; aesthetics, assessed using the pink aesthetic score (PES); peri-implant marginal bone level changes; and patient satisfaction, recorded by blinded assessors. RESULTS. Three patients from each group dropped out within 3 years after loading. Five years after loading, there were no significant differences between the two groups in median PES score, assessed by a blind assessor, (central: 10 [IQR: 5.5], palatal: 8.5 [IQR: 6.75], median difference =-1.0; 95% CI:-7.0 to 4.0; P = 0.571); median bone level (central: 0.45 mm [IQR: 1.76], palatal: 0.45 mm [IQR: 1.93], median difference = 0 mm; 95% CI:-1.7 to 3.0; P = 1.000); bone level changes (central: 0.15 mm [IQR: 0.70], palatal:-0.05 mm [IQR: 1.23], median difference =-0.20 mm; P = 0.471); implant failures (one in each group, 14%, difference in proportion = 0.00; 95% CI:-0.39 to 0.39; P = 1.000); or complications (two palatal group patients and one central group patient, difference in proportion = 0.14; 95% CI:-0.28 to 0.52; P = 1.000). Furthermore, patients from both groups were equally satisfied with both function and aesthetics (both P = 0.699). CONCLUSIONS. These preliminary results suggest that positioning of immediate post-ex-traction implants 3 mm more palatally may not, in fact, improve aesthetics; however, the sample size of the present study was very limited, and larger trials are therefore required to confirm or refute these findings

Dentin dysplasia type I: a challenge for treatment with dental implants

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Dentin dysplasia type I is characterized by a defect of dentin development with clinical normal appearance of the permanent teeth but no or only rudimentary root formation. Early loss of all teeth and concomitant underdevelopment of the jaws are challenging for successful treatment with dental implants.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>A combination of sinus lifting and onlay bone augmentation based on treatment planning using stereolithographic templates was used in a patient with dentin dysplasia type I to rehabilitate the masticatory function.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>(i) a predisposition for an increased and accelerated bone resorption was observed in our patient, (ii) bone augmentation was successful using a mixture of allogenic graft material with autogenous bone preventing fast bone resorption, (iii) surgical planning, based on stereolithographic models and surgical templates, facilitated the accurate placement of dental implants.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>Bony augmentation and elaborate treatment planning is helpful for oral rehabilitation of patients with dentin dysplasia type I.</p

Does Apico-Coronal Implant Position Influence Peri-Implant Marginal Bone Loss? A 36-Month Follow-Up Randomized Clinical Trial

Purpose: Preserving peri-implant bone and reducing exposure of the rough implant surface might influence long-term outcomes of implant therapy. The aim of this study was to compare peri-implant clinical and radiologic parameters after crestal and subcrestal dental implant placement at 36 months’ follow-up. Materials and Methods: We carried out a randomized clinical trial involving partially edentulous patients in need of an implant-supported, partial fixed dental prosthesis or a single crown. Patients were randomized according to the implant insertion depth: implants placed approximately 2 mm below the bone crest (test group) or implants placed at bone crest level (control group). They were evaluated 6, 12, 24, and 36 months after prosthetic loading. Peri-implant marginal bone loss was the primary outcome, and the following secondary outcomes were registered: coronal bone changes, plaque index, probing depth, modified bleeding index, retraction and width of the peri-implant mucosa, and peri-implant health condition. Implant survival and success rates after 36 months’ follow-up were calculated. Results: The study comprised 128 patients (83 men and 45 women; mean age, 54.4 ± 12.2 years) and a total of 265 implants (133 in control group and 132 in test group). No statistically significant differences in the peri-implant clinical parameters were found. After 3 years’ follow-up, 53.4% of the crestal implants and 25.8% of the subcrestal implants presented marginal bone loss, with a mean exposed rough surface of –0.2 ± 0.3 mm and –0.09 ± 0.1 mm, respectively (P =.001). The overall success rate was 99.6%. Conclusions: Crestal and subcrestal implants showed similar clinical outcomes 3 years after prosthetic loading. Significant differences were observed in the radiologic parameters, showing less peri-implant marginal bone loss with subcrestal implants

Implant treatment in atrophic posterior mandibles: Vertical regeneration with block bone grafts versus implants with 5.5-mm intrabony length

Purpose: To retrospectively compare the outcomes of implants placed in posterior mandibles vertically regenerated with onlay autogenous block bone grafts and short dental implants. Materials and Methods: Consecutive patients with vertical bone atrophy in edentulous mandibular posterior regions (7 to 8 mm of bone above the inferior alveolar nerve) were treated with either implants placed in regenerated bone using autologous block bone grafts (group 1) or short implants (with 5.5-mm intrabony length) in native bone (group 2) between 2005 and 2010 and followed for 12 months after loading. The procedure used was the established treatment protocol for this type of patient at the Oral Surgery Unit (University of Valencia, Spain) at the time of surgery. All grafts were obtained using piezosurgery. The outcomes assessed were: complications related to the procedure, implant survival, implant success, and peri-implant marginal bone loss. Statistical analysis was done using the Fisher exact test and the Mann-Whitney test. Results: Thirtyseven patients were included, 20 (45 implants) in group 1 and 17 (35 implants) in group 2. In group 1, 13 implants were less than 10 mm long (2 were 7 mm and 11 were 8.5 mm), and 32 were 10 mm or longer; the diameter was 3.6 mm in 6 implants, 4.2 mm in 31, and 5.5 mm in 8. In group 2 all implants were 7 mm long; the diameter measured 4.2 mm in 14 implants and 5.5 mm in 21 implants. Complications related to the block bone grafting procedure were temporary hypoesthesia in one patient, wound dehiscence with graft exposure in three patients, and exposure of the osteosynthesis screw without bone graft exposure in one patient. After 12 months, implant survival rates were 95.6% in group 1 and 97.1 % in group 2; success rates were 91.1% and 97.1%, respectively. The average marginal bone loss was 0.7 ± 1.1 mm in group 1 and 0.6 ± 0.3 mm in group 2. Conclusions: When residual bone height over the mandibular canal is between 7 and 8 mm, short implants (with 5.5-mm intrabony length) might be a preferable treatment option over vertical augmentation, reducing chair time, expense, and morbidity

Implant abutment cleaning by plasma of argon: 5-year follow-up of a randomized controlled trial

Background: Contamination of implant abutments could potentially influence the peri-implant tissue inflammatory response. The aim of the present study is to assess the radiographic bone changes around customized, platform-switched abutments placed according to the ‘‘one-abutment-one-time’’ protocol, with and without plasma of argon cleaning treatment. Methods: Thirty healthy patients with thin gingival biotype (&lt;1 mm) and history of periodontal disease received one maxillary implant each. Immediately before abutment connection, patients were randomly assigned to control group (cleaning protocol by steaming) or test group (plasma of argon treatment). Outcome measures were: 1) success rate of implants and prostheses; 2) biologic and prosthetic complications; 3) peri-implant marginal bone loss (MBL); 4) esthetic and periodontal parameters; and 5) patient satisfaction. Results: Neither implants nor prostheses were lost in either group at the 5-year follow-up examination. Overall, both groups showed a slight amount of peri-implant bone loss from baseline to 5 years. A statistically higher mean MBL was found in the control group compared with the test group at 6, 24, and 60 months after crown connection. Nevertheless, during the entire follow-up period, intragroup comparison demonstrated statistically significant mean MBL in the control group, but not in the test group. The test group showed a higher mean gain at the soft tissue margin, but not for the papilla. All implants showed good periodontal parameters, with no significant differences between groups. Conclusion: Plasma of argon could be used to disinfect implant abutments before insertion to minimize future peri-implant bone resorptio