Buccal bone thickness of maxillary anterior teeth: A systematic review and meta‐analysis

Tsigarida, Alexandra; Toscano, Jeremy; Bezerra, Beatriz de Brito; Geminiani, Alessandro; Barmak, Abdul Basir; Caton, Jack G.; Papaspyridakos, Panos; Chochlidakis, Konstantinos

doi:10.1111/jcpe.13347

Cited by 40 publications

(47 citation statements)

References 41 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…It was found that along the 6 mm of the alveolar crest, there are no meaningful differences in RW, BW and PW/LW. This finding contradicts most published data reporting a consistent increase in the RW [ 31 ] BW and PW/LW in the dentate maxilla and the mandible, when moving apically [ 31 , 37 , 39 , 56 , 57 ]. This happens probably since statistical comparisons were performed between consecutive depths along the ridge and not between intervals/ group of depths.…”

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 99%

“…Several factors contribute to this high heterogeneity, which are mostly connected to the study population selected in the included studies. Factors, such as possible anatomical difference between males and females [ 31 , 42 , 57 – 59 ], possible age effects (young vs. aged population), as in [ 31 , 38 , 57 ], or ethnic differences [ 29 ], were all found to effect alveolar ridge components, contributing to statistical heterogeneity. Moreover, no information was given in any of the included studies on the healing time following tooth extraction, which is a determinant factor influencing the extent of ridge resorption and the difference between RW in dentate and edentulous state [ 15 , 16 ].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Quantitative assessment of the jawbone quality classification: A meta-analysis study

Shemtov‐Yona

2021

PLoS ONE

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Aim Bone quality is evaluated using bone density for qualitative classification, a characteristic that may be delicate to evaluate. Contemporary implantology that relies on modern measurement techniques, needs a more quantitative estimate of the bone quality. Materials and methods PubMed and EMBASE databases were searched with no time restriction. Clinical and radiographic studies reporting on alveolar ridge dimensions and its parameters in different areas of the dentate and edentulous jaws were included. A meta-analysis was performed using random effect models to report a combined mean for alveolar ridge and its parameters. Meta regression statistical tests were performed in order to identify differences in those outcome parameters. Results 30 studies were included. The majority of the selected studies (total of 27) used live human subjects and CBCT to analyze alveolar ridge dimensions and its parameters. Using the combined mean obtained from the meta-analysis, a typical portrait of the alveolar ridge was constructed, and a geometrically based quantitative bone classification proposed. The quantitative classification was found to match the existing qualitative classification. Conclusion A geometry-based analysis was constructed that yields valuable insights on the bone type based on its components and on the dynamics of the dentate / edentulous states.

show abstract

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 99%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Quantitative assessment of the jawbone quality classification: A meta-analysis study

Shemtov‐Yona

2021

PLoS ONE

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Of the 16 articles included, 4 were randomized clinical trials [ 4 , 6 , 13 , 14 ], 5 were prospective clinical trials [ 15 , 16 , 17 , 18 , 19 ], 4 were retrospective studies [ 2 , 7 , 20 , 21 ], and 3 were case series [ 8 , 22 , 23 ]. In addition, 6 articles compared the outcomes of conventional immediate dental implant placement versus such placement using the socket-shield technique [ 4 , 6 , 12 , 13 , 14 , 15 ].…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…However, this location usually presents a narrow buccal cortical plate, which increases the risk of marginal bone resorption after tooth extraction [ 22 ]. Moreover, Tsigarida et al reported that most of the buccal bone walls in anterior maxillary teeth are narrower than 1 mm at the coronal third, and buccal bone walls wider than 2 mm were only measured in the middle third of canine and premolar teeth and in the apical third of every tooth [ 23 ]. However, the thickness of the marginal bone crest around teeth can remain stable due to the vascular supply from the periodontal vessels [ 24 ], although a thin marginal bone crest around dental implants can be reabsorbed, leading to the exposure of the rough surface of the dental implant [ 24 ] because the fasciculated bone of the internal portion of the alveolus is usually reabsorbed after tooth extraction without the adjacent periodontal tissues [ 24 ], leading to an unaesthetic effect due to the retraction of the buccal mucosa after buccal bone resorption [ 4 ].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Failure Rate, Marginal Bone Loss, and Pink Esthetic with Socket-Shield Technique for Immediate Dental Implant Placement in the Esthetic Zone. A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Bohórquez

Rucco

Zubizarreta-Macho

et al. 2021

Biology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Aim: To compare the failure rate, marginal bone loss, and pink esthetic for the socket-shield technique and the conventional technique for immediate dental implant placement in the esthetic zone. Material and methods: A systematic literature review and meta-analysis, based on the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) recommendations, of clinical studies that evaluated the failure rate, marginal bone loss, and pink esthetic with the socket-shield technique for immediate dental implant placement in the esthetic zone was performed. A total of 4 databases were consulted in the literature search: PubMed-MEDLINE, Scopus, Embase, and Web of Science. After eliminating duplicated articles and applying the inclusion criteria, 16 articles were selected for the qualitative and quantitative analysis. Results: Four randomized controlled trials, five prospective clinical studies, four retrospective studies, and three case series were included in the meta-analysis. The dental implant failure rate for the socket-shield technique for immediate dental implant placement was 1.37% (95% CI, 0.21–2.54%); however, no statistically significant differences between the conventional and socket-shield technique were found. The estimated mean difference in the marginal bone loss for the socket-shield technique was −0.5 mm (95% CI, −0.82 to −0.18) and statistically significant (p < 0.01), with a high heterogeneity (I2 = 99%). The mean pink esthetic score was 12.27 (Q test = 4.47; p-value = 0.61; I2 = 0%). The difference in pink esthetic between the conventional (n = 55) and socket-shield techniques (n = 55) for immediate dental implant placement was 1.15 (95% CI, 0.73–1.58; Q test = 8.88; p value = 0.11; I2 = 44%). The follow-up time was found to be significant (beta coefficient = 0.023; R2 = 85.6%; QM = 3.82; p = 0.049) for the PES for the socket-shield technique. Conclusions: Within the limitations of this systematic review with meta-analysis, the dental implant failure rate did not differ between the socket-shield technique and conventional technique for immediate implant placement in the esthetic zone. However, a lower marginal bone loss and higher pink esthetic scores were found for the socket-shield technique compared to the conventional technique.

show abstract

“…This area often shows a thin buccal bone plate (i.e., less than 1 mm), highly correlated with the loss of volume mentioned above (Tomasi et al, 2010;Tsigarida et al, 2020). In order to prevent this buccal hard tissue shrinkage, the use of bone substitute between the extraction socket buccal wall and the dental implant has been suggested in several studies (Araújo et al, 2015;Fickl et al, 2008).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Aesthetic outcomes of non‐functional immediately restored single post‐extraction implants with and without connective tissue graft: A multicentre randomized controlled trial

Ferrantino

Camurati²,

Gambino³

et al. 2021

Clinical Oral Implants Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objectives: To compare the 1-year aesthetic results of flapless single implants, placed in fresh extraction sockets with bone replacement and immediate provisional restoration with or without a connective tissue graft (CTG). Material and Methods:The present study proposes a partially blinded multicentre parallel randomized controlled trial, where computer-generated tables were used for central randomization to allocate treatments. A total of 59 of the 60 patients screened by eight private practices in Northern Italy fulfilled the inclusion criteria.Immediate implants were placed in a fresh extraction socket with a non-functional immediate provisional restoration with (Test group) or without (Control group) a CTG.The primary outcome variable was the implant Crown Aesthetic Index (ICAI) at the 1-year follow-up.Results: ICAI for the 59 randomized patients (Test group = 31, Control group = 28) at the 1-year follow-up was 4.69 (95% CI = 3.16-6.22) for the Test group and 3.45 (95% CI = 1.83-5.08) for the Control group, without statistically significant difference between the two groups (p = .086). One implant failure was recorded in each group, resulting in an implant survival rate of 96.8% [95% CI = 83.3-99.9] for the Test group and 96.4% [95% CI = 81.7-99.9] for the Control group. Other secondary outcome variables and complication rates were comparable across the two groups.Conclusions: Within the limitations of the present clinical trial, the results suggested that the adjunct use of CTG is not mandatory to achieve successful aesthetic outcomes for a well-planned immediate implant placement with immediate nonfunctional provisional restoration in a fresh extraction socket.

show abstract

Buccal bone thickness of maxillary anterior teeth: A systematic review and meta‐analysis

Cited by 40 publications

References 41 publications

Quantitative assessment of the jawbone quality classification: A meta-analysis study

Quantitative assessment of the jawbone quality classification: A meta-analysis study

Failure Rate, Marginal Bone Loss, and Pink Esthetic with Socket-Shield Technique for Immediate Dental Implant Placement in the Esthetic Zone. A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Aesthetic outcomes of non‐functional immediately restored single post‐extraction implants with and without connective tissue graft: A multicentre randomized controlled trial

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About