Labial Bone Thickness in Area of Anterior Maxillary Implants Associated with Crestal Labial Soft Tissue Thickness

Abstract

Based on this study, CLSTT and ILBT were highly associated in the anterior maxillary region.

Long term facial alveolar bone changes associated with endosseous implants in the anterior maxilla.

“…We also found FABr at this level to increase from a mean of 0.39 ± 0.70 mm at the central incisor region to 0.74 ± 1.03 mm at the second premolar region. This is substantially lower than the mean facial bone thickness of 1.28 mm at the same level reported by Roe, et al, (2012) for implants placed 1 year following maxillary anterior single immediate implant placement and 1.79 ± 0.68 mm reported by Le and Borzabadi-Farahani (2012) 4 months post-operatively.…”

Treatment of Labial Soft Tissue Recession Around Dental Implants in the Esthetic Zone Using Guided Bone Regeneration With Mineralized Allograft: A Retrospective Clinical Case Series

“…First, although no prior reports of a GBR procedure resulting in clinical increases of both keratinized tissue height and gingival thickness were found in the dental literature by the present authors, a limited number of retrospective studies 13,42 have reported an increase in soft tissue thickness around dental implants primarily in the anterior maxilla after increasing the thickness of the facial bone through GBR. Further research is needed to understand these observed correlations between bone and soft tissue thickness.…”

“…11 As labial bone thickness resorbs, there is a corresponding loss in labial soft tissue thickness around the implant. [12][13] Moderate recession can make thin, pink gingival tissues appear dark due to the presence of the underlying metal abutment and implant, and further bone loss can cause unsightly metal exposure above the gingival margin. In general, implants carry a higher risk of soft tissue complications when placed in thin tissue biotypes or with labial inclinations when the labial plate thickness is <2 mm.…”

“…13,15 In order to identify predictors of gingival recession around single-tooth restorations in the anterior maxilla, it has been reported that only a buccal shoulder position of the implant (OR = 17.2) was associated with midfacial gingival resorption. 16 For interproximal tissues, ridge recontouring was associated with recession of both mesial (OR = 3.4) and distal (OR = 11.2) papillae.…”

“…27 While esthetics were enhanced and patients were doubtlessly satisfied during short-term follow-up, the ability to camouflage a bony defect with or without exposed implant threads is highly limited without the support of the underlying bone, which is the main cause of soft tissue recession. 13,49,50 In addition to soft tissue recession, marginal bone loss has been associated with increased peri-implant stress concentrations in the crestal bone region.…”