Focus on Epithelialized Palatal Grafts. Part 2: Implant Site Development

Abstract

Introduction The epithelialized palatal graft (EPG), introduced in 1963, has persisted as the gold standard for gingival augmentation, and in the present era, mucosal augmentation around dental implants has become an important concern. A limited body of evidence suggests peri‐implant mucosal augmentation may favorably impact bone and mucosal stability and peri‐implant health under some circumstances. Although more contemporary procedures for peri‐implant mucosal augmentation are often preferred based on convenience and esthetic considerations, EPG augmentation at dental implant sites is distinguishable from methods which do not deepen the vestibule and eliminate unfavorable superficial soft tissue. Implant sites augmented with EPG are qualitatively distinct from sites augmented using other methods. Case Series Seven generally healthy patients received EPG augmentation before dental implant placement, at implant placement, before implant uncovering, or after implant uncovering. In each case, the patient exhibited a favorable zone of attached peri‐implant mucosa following treatment. Conclusions Reliable mucosal augmentation with EPG is achievable at multiple phases in the course of dental implant therapy. EPG augmentation offers distinct clinical advantages and may be preferable to other mucosal augmentation strategies at some dental implant sites.

Técnicas de manipulação de tecido mole sobre implante dentário: Revisão de literatura

“…A recuperação correta, irá proporcionar a adesão do tecido mucoso ao implante, impedindo que produtos e microrganismos provenientes da cavidade oral tenham acesso ao tecido ósseo, auxiliando na correta osseointegração 7,8,9,10 . Uma largura mínima da mucosa ceratinizada está correlacionada à saúde gengival.…”

“…Foi concluído que para manter a saúde dos tecidos moles, era necessário ter no mínimo 2mm de mucosa ceratinizada. Além disso, estudos demonstraram que em pacientes com implante dental que possuíam menos que 2mm de mucosa ceratinizada apresentavam maior desconforto durante a escovação, maior acúmulo de placa e inflamação peri-implantar 8,11 .…”