Soft and hard tissue evaluation of guided socket shield implant cases

Abstract

BackgroundThe socket‐shield (SS) technique results in long‐term functional osseo‐ and dento‐integration, preserving the dimensional stability of hard and soft tissues over time. This study aimed to describe the successful implementation of a surgical technique to facilitate “SS” cases.MethodsThe cases included males and females aged 32–81 years consecutively treated between 2020 and 2023 (longest follow‐up, 3.5 years). For each case, pre‐ and post‐operative cone‐beam computed tomography (Digital Imaging and Communications in Medicine files) and intraoral optical scans (IOS; STL files) were performed. Digital immediate implant placement and simultaneous tooth extraction and SS production were planned using an implant planning software. Implants were planned considering sagittal‐ridge and tooth‐root angular‐configuration. Surgical guides were used to perform the digitally‐supported SS technique. All cases were planned and surgically performed by one operator (Pedro M. Trejo). Preoperative digital IOS‐models were superimposed to post‐operative models to assess soft‐tissue changes. Pre and post sagittal views were used to assess the radiographic buccal‐plate thickness at various healing times. An investigator not involved with case planning or treatment performed measurements.ResultsResults reflected soft‐tissue stability with minimal mean thickness change at 0‐, 1‐, 2‐, and 3‐mm measurement levels of 0.03, ‐0.2, 0.14, ‐0.07, and 0.04 mm, respectively, with a mean gingival‐margin change of 0.04 mm. The free gingival‐margin change ranged from a 0.58‐mm gain in height to a ‐0.57‐mm loss. The mean radiographic buccal‐plate thickness post‐operatively was 2.04 mm (range, 0.7–2.9 mm).ConclusionThe digitally‐supported guided SS technique enables predictable immediate implant‐placement positions and stable buccal peri‐implant soft and hard tissues over time.Key PointsWhy are these cases new information? The uniqueness of the surgical technique described herein is that it results in favorable positions of immediate, socket‐shielded (SSed), implant placements, with soft‐ and hard‐tissue stability as the byproduct. What are the keys to successful management of these cases? Digitally, plan for the best possible implant position within the alveolar housing to satisfy prosthetic requirements, and then adjust this position to accommodate the socket shield dimensions. Digitally, provide a space/gap between the future dentinal shield and the implant. Clinically, allow for time to carve the final position and dimensions of the shield. Plan ahead the extent of the apical third of the SS, and the removal of the apex, if dealing with a long root. What are the primary limitations to success in these cases? Inadequate use of digital technology; case‐sensitive technique requires proper execution of each digital and technical clinical step.