Journal of clinical periodontology · 2023
Clinical efficacy of soft-tissue augmentation on tissue preservation at immediate implant sites: A randomized controlled trial.
Рандомизированное исследованиеСтатьяПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Lee Chun-Teh, Tran Duong, Tsukiboshi Yosuke, Min Seiko, Kim Sung K, Ayilavarapu Srinivas, Weltman Robin
Аннотация
AIM: This randomized controlled trial aimed to investigate the efficacy of soft-tissue augmentation (STA) with a subepithelial connective tissue graft (SCTG) or an acellular dermal matrix (ADM) on reducing tissue alterations at an immediate implant site.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: This trial had three groups: (i) immediate implant with SCTG (ICT group); (ii) immediate implant with ADM (IAD group); (iii) immediate implant without STA (control group). Forty-six patients were randomly assigned to each group. Implants were placed at the maxillary anterior or premolar areas and restored after the 6-month visit. Clinical outcomes, including buccal soft-tissue contour, peri-implant mucosal level, soft-tissue thickness and keratinized tissue width, were measured at baseline and at 3-, 6- and 12-month follow-up visits. Radiographic bone levels were measured at baseline and at 6- and 12-month follow-up visits. Patient-reported outcomes were also collected.
RESULTS: STA procedures increased peri-implant mucosal thickness and maintained buccal soft-tissue contours. Compared to the control group, STA groups did not prevent peri-implant mucosal recession or interproximal bone resorption. Generally, no significant differences in clinical outcomes were detected between the ICT and IAD groups. Most patients were highly satisfied with the immediate implant procedure and outcomes without significant differences between groups.
CONCLUSIONS: STA at immediate implant sites enhanced soft-tissue thickness and maintained soft-tissue contours but did not prevent peri-implant mucosal recession or interproximal bone resorption. Long-term follow-up should be performed since these results were reported for only up to 1 year.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: This trial had three groups: (i) immediate implant with SCTG (ICT group); (ii) immediate implant with ADM (IAD group); (iii) immediate implant without STA (control group). Forty-six patients were randomly assigned to each group. Implants were placed at the maxillary anterior or premolar areas and restored after the 6-month visit. Clinical outcomes, including buccal soft-tissue contour, peri-implant mucosal level, soft-tissue thickness and keratinized tissue width, were measured at baseline and at 3-, 6- and 12-month follow-up visits. Radiographic bone levels were measured at baseline and at 6- and 12-month follow-up visits. Patient-reported outcomes were also collected.
RESULTS: STA procedures increased peri-implant mucosal thickness and maintained buccal soft-tissue contours. Compared to the control group, STA groups did not prevent peri-implant mucosal recession or interproximal bone resorption. Generally, no significant differences in clinical outcomes were detected between the ICT and IAD groups. Most patients were highly satisfied with the immediate implant procedure and outcomes without significant differences between groups.
CONCLUSIONS: STA at immediate implant sites enhanced soft-tissue thickness and maintained soft-tissue contours but did not prevent peri-implant mucosal recession or interproximal bone resorption. Long-term follow-up should be performed since these results were reported for only up to 1 year.