Guided bone regeneration and abutment connection augment the buccal soft tissue contour: 3‐year results of a prospective comparative clinical study

Benić, Goran I.; Ge, Yajun; Gallucci, German O.; Jung, Ronald E.; Schneider, David J.; Hämmerle, Christoph H. F.

doi:10.1111/clr.12786

Cited by 30 publications

(38 citation statements)

References 20 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…; Benic et al. ). In the first study, peri‐implant defects augmented with DBBM and CM were clinically assessed at re‐entry and visualized with CBCT after 5 years (Jung et al.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 97%

“…In the second clinical trial, peri‐implant bone defects and thin bone plates were grafted with DBBM and covered with CM (Benic et al. ). Impressions were taken prior to implant placement, at 3 months, at 6 months, at 1, and 3 years.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…(c, d) GBR procedures with particulated (left) and block (right) DBBM in combination with a CM (from Benic et al. ).…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Guided bone regeneration with particulate vs. block xenogenic bone substitutes: a pilot cone beam computed tomographic investigation

Benić

Thoma

Jung

et al. 2017

Clinical Oral Implants Res

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…; Benic et al. ). In the first study, peri‐implant defects augmented with DBBM and CM were clinically assessed at re‐entry and visualized with CBCT after 5 years (Jung et al.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 97%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Guided bone regeneration with particulate vs. block xenogenic bone substitutes: a pilot cone beam computed tomographic investigation

Benić

Thoma

Jung

et al. 2017

Clinical Oral Implants Res

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…GBR has further shown to be effective to regenerate volume along the mucosal margin in terms of tissue height and thickness (Benic et al. ).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Volumetric changes and peri‐implant health at implant sites with or without soft tissue grafting in the esthetic zone, a retrospective case–control study with a 5‐year follow‐up

Bienz

Jung

Sapata

et al. 2017

Clinical Oral Implants Res

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Daniel S (2017). Volumetric changes and peri-implant health at implant sites with or without soft tissue grafting in the esthetic zone, a retrospective case-control study with a 5-year follow-up. Clinical Oral Implants Research, 28(11) Materials and methods:In 18 partially edentulous patients, dental implants were placed in the esthetic zone (15-25) with simultaneous guided bone regeneration, followed by submerged healing. During the healing phase, eight patients (test) received a subepithelial connective tissue graft, whereas 10 patients (control) did not receive any soft tissue augmentation. Subsequently, abutment connection was performed and final reconstructions were inserted. Impressions were taken 1 week after crown insertion and at 5 years. Obtained casts were scanned and superimposed for volumetric and linear measurements. The mean distance (MD) in the midbuccal area between the two surfaces and the differences in buccal marginal mucosal level (bMML change ) and in ridge width (RW change ) were evaluated. Peri-implant health was assessed using probing pocket depth (PPD) values, plaque index (PlI) and bleeding on probing (BOP). None of the comparisons between the groups revealed statistically significant differences (p>0.35). A small sample size must be considered, however. Results Conclusions:Limited by a retrospective case-control study design, implant sites with and without soft tissue grafting on the buccal side revealed only minimal volumetric and linear changes and stability of peri-implant parameters over 5 years.3

show abstract

“…The mean distance from the buccal implant shoulder as assessed on CBCTs amounted to 1.6 mm, whereas the range reached from 0.1 mm to 14.9 mm. In a recent study, 18 implants completely surrounded by native bone were compared with 10 implant exhibiting bone defects treated by GBR . Assessments of buccal soft tissue contours were done prior to implant placement and 3 years thereafter.…”

Section: Observations and Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The etiology of hard‐ and soft‐tissue deficiencies at dental implants: A narrative review

Hämmerle

Tarnow

2018

J Clinic Periodontology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Hard- and soft-tissue deficiencies at implant sites may result from a multitude of factors. They encompass natural resorption processes following tooth extraction, trauma, infectious diseases such as periodontitis, peri-implantitis, endodontic infections, growth and development, expansion of the sinus floor, anatomical preconditions, mechanical overload, thin soft tissues, lack of keratinized mucosa, malpositioning of implants, migration of teeth, lifelong growth, and systemic diseases. When more than one factor leading to hard and/or soft-tissue deficiencies appear together, the severity of the resulting condition may increase. Efforts should be made to better identify the relative importance of these etiological factors, and to develop strategies to counteract their negative effects on our patient's wellbeing.

show abstract

Guided bone regeneration and abutment connection augment the buccal soft tissue contour: 3‐year results of a prospective comparative clinical study

Cited by 30 publications

References 20 publications

Guided bone regeneration with particulate vs. block xenogenic bone substitutes: a pilot cone beam computed tomographic investigation

Guided bone regeneration with particulate vs. block xenogenic bone substitutes: a pilot cone beam computed tomographic investigation

Volumetric changes and peri‐implant health at implant sites with or without soft tissue grafting in the esthetic zone, a retrospective case–control study with a 5‐year follow‐up

The etiology of hard‐ and soft‐tissue deficiencies at dental implants: A narrative review

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About