Background: Alveolar bone resorption and labial bone plate reduction follow teeth extraction due to the deficiency of blood supply, derived from the loss of periodontal ligaments, and hence the socket shield technique was introduced to preserve the periodontal ligaments related perfusion. Purpose: The study aimed to compare the vertical and horizontal changes of the buccal cortical bone plates, encountered after utilizing the socket shield technique with immediate temporization vs an immediate implant placement with immediate temporization, and analyzing the differences of the implant stability and pink esthetic score evaluation between both techniques. Materials and Methods: A total of 40 dental implants were placed in the maxillary esthetic zone, 20 implants were placed using the socket shield technique with immediate temporization; the study group and 20 implants were placed immediately with immediate temporization; the control group. All patients received immediate and 6 months postoperative CBCT to assess the dimensional changes in the labial bone plates. Implant stability quotients (ISQs) and pink esthetic scores were measured at the time of implant placement and 6 months postoperatively. Results: The horizontal bone loss; ranged from 0 to0.26 (0.15) mm and 0.03 to0.44 (0.32) mm for the study and control groups, respectively. The vertical bone loss; ranged from 0.11 to 0.55 (0.31) mm and 0.25 to 1.51 (0.7) mm for the study and control groups, respectively. The ISQ for the study group increased from 68.6 ± 3.81 to 76.7 ± 3.49, while in the control group it increased from 66.4 ± 5.64 to 75 ± 4.4. PES for the study group increased from 11 to 12, while in the control group it decreased from 13 to 9. Conclusion: The socket shield technique with immediate temporization is a reliable method to reduce the labial bone loss following teeth extraction. However, further studies are required to investigate the effect of grafting the jumping gaps, to evaluate the graft contribution in further reduction of the bone loss.
Background
Several techniques have been proposed to reconstruct deficient alveolar ridges including bone blocks, ridge splitting and guided bone regeneration (GBR). GBR has been successfully established in restoring horizontal bone deficiency. However, yet still there is a debate regarding the ideal barrier for GBR.
Purpose
To evaluate the quantity and the quality of the bone gained using collagen membrane with 1:1 mixture of autogenous and anoraganic bovine bone mineral compared to titanium mesh with the same mixture of bone for GBR of horizontally deficient maxillary ridges.
Materials and Methods
Two different grafting techniques were evaluated, 10 patients receiving GBR using native collagen membrane using 1:1 autogenous and anorganic bovine bone mineral (ABBM) bone mixture, and 10 patients receiving GBR using titanium mesh with same mixture of bone.
Results
Statistical analysis showed a significant increase in alveolar bone width in both techniques with a mean bone gain of 4.0 mm for Collagen group and 3.7 mm for titanium mesh group. Bone area percent was almost 28% for both groups. For Ti‐mesh group, six sites soft tissue healing was uneventfully with no signs of wound dehiscence. However, four cases showed mesh exposure first 3 patients showed this exposure 3 weeks postoperatively while the fourth patient showed exposure 4 months postoperatively. The mean graft resorption in the Collagen and mesh group 6 months postoperative was considered nonsignificant.
Conclusions
GBR with both collagen membrane and titanium mesh using a 1:1 mixture of autogenous and ABBM is a viable technique for horizontal augmentation of deficient maxillary alveolar ridges. Titanium mesh is a more technique sensitive compared to collagen membrane. Soft tissue dehiscence and difficulty during second stage removal should limit its use in augmentation of horizontally deficient maxillary ridges.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.