For the rehabilitation of the single-tooth space, a number of prosthodontic techniques have been known and are well established. Fixed and removable partial dentures being the easiest are associated with the major drawbacks of loss of tooth structure and vitality. Though replaced by implant supported rehabilitations, crestal bone loss has been reported as the one of the major factor affecting the long term prognosis. Thus the main aim of the study was to assess and compare the reverberations of immediate and delayed placement of implant on crestal bone height. Material and methodology: 30 patients aged between 18-60 years were selected on the basis of inclusion criteria and divided randomly into two groups of 15 each. In Group A immediate implant placement was done while in Group B delayed implant placement was done. In both the groups, Crestal bone height (Buccolingual width + interproximal height), keratinized mucosa index, Jemt papilla fill index, Plaque index, Gingival index and Periodontal attachment levels were analyzed at baseline, after 3, 6 and 12 months. Results: The parameters were recorded and analyzed statistically. Categorical values were analyzed using mean, frequency and percentage while descriptive analysis was done using student t test. It was observed that mean changes in crestal bone height, papilla filled index, periodontal attachment levels, gingival and plaque index was statistically significant in both the groups from baseline to 12 months, while keratinized mucosa index represented no change between the two groups. Conclusion: The study came to the conclusion that placing an immediate implant rather than a delayed should be significantly preferred. Though in immediate implant placement, crestal bone is preserved and gingival architecture is prevented from collapsing along with time of treatment, preservation of aesthetics and patient comfort being the other major advantages.
Keywords: Aesthetics, Crestal Bone Height, Delayed Implant, Extraction Socket, Immediate Implant, Periodontal Parameters.
Aim: The aim of this study was to assess the effect of soft denture liners on mandibular ridge resorption in complete denture wearers after two years of use. Methodology: The study included 32 patients ranging in age from 35 to 65 years old. Those patients were completely edentulous with well formed ridges, Class I relation and no medical problem. Thirty two selected patients were divided into two groups, namely Experimental group and Control group. Control group (n = 16, 8 males and 8 females) received conventional maxillary and mandibular complete dentures. Whereas in Experimental group, (n = 16, 8 males and 8 females) silicone lined lower complete denture were made. Three panoramic radiographs (orthopantomogram [OPG]) were taken for each participant to assess the amount of bone resorption; immediately, one year, and two years after denture insertion. For comparing two groups at three different time intervals, analysis of variance (ANOVA) two way with post-hoc tests was used. A statistically significant pvalue of less than 0.05 was considered. Results: After denture delivery, there was significant change in bone height in all patients ( p < 0.001) . The comparison of bone height between the two groups in different regions at different time intervals revealed a significant difference in bone levels at baseline to one year and baseline to two years. However, Experimental group experienced 50% less bone loss than control group over a two-year period. Conclusion: Based on the findings of the current study, it can be inferred that use of soft liners helps in reducing residual ridge resorption significantly when compared with conventional denture material.
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.