UZH-Logo

Maintenance Infos

A prospective, controlled clinical trial evaluating the clinical radiological and aesthetic outcome after 5 years of immediately placed implants in sockets exhibiting periapical pathology


Jung, Ronald E; Zaugg, Balthasar; Philipp, Alexander O H; Truninger, Thomas C; Siegenthaler, David W; Hämmerle, Christoph H F (2013). A prospective, controlled clinical trial evaluating the clinical radiological and aesthetic outcome after 5 years of immediately placed implants in sockets exhibiting periapical pathology. Clinical Oral Implants Research, 24(8):839-846.

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: The aim was to compare the clinical, aesthetic and radiological outcome of immediately placed implants in sockets with or without periapical pathology 5 years after placement. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Twenty-seven patients were followed 5 years after immediate implant placement (test-group: 12 patients with periapical pathologies; control-group: 15 patients without periapical pathology). Clinical (FMBS, FMPS, CAL, keratinized mucosa), aesthetical (length of clinical crown, Papilla index), and radiological (vertical distance implant shoulder to first bone to implant contact (IS-BIC)) parameters were assessed. Both 95% confidence intervals, as well as results of statistical tests (one-sample, two-sample, paired t-test) were provided. RESULTS: After 5 years the implant survival rate was 100% for all 27 implants. In the test group the width of the keratinized mucosa increased significantly over the observation period (0.8 ± 1.0 mm). Concerning aesthetic parameters at the 3-month as well as at the 5-year examination no statistically significant difference could be found between the two groups. In the control-group the papilla mesial and distal to the implant increased statistically significant during the observation period by 0.5 ± 0.5 and 0.4 ± 0.6 index score points, respectively. The position of the gingival margin at the implant site and the two neighboring teeth remained stable. At the 5-year visit IS-BIC measured between 1.4 ± 0.5 mm (mesial, control) and 1.7 ± 0.7 mm (distal, test), no significant difference could be found between the two groups. Over the observation period no statistically significant change of IS-BIC could be found in the test- as well as in the control-group. None of the examined radiographs revealed any signs of retrograde peri-implantitis. CONCLUSION: The replacement of teeth exhibiting periapical pathologies by implants placed immediately after tooth extraction can be a successful treatment modality with no disadvantages in clinical, aesthetical and radiological parameters to immediately placed implants into healthy sockets.

OBJECTIVE: The aim was to compare the clinical, aesthetic and radiological outcome of immediately placed implants in sockets with or without periapical pathology 5 years after placement. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Twenty-seven patients were followed 5 years after immediate implant placement (test-group: 12 patients with periapical pathologies; control-group: 15 patients without periapical pathology). Clinical (FMBS, FMPS, CAL, keratinized mucosa), aesthetical (length of clinical crown, Papilla index), and radiological (vertical distance implant shoulder to first bone to implant contact (IS-BIC)) parameters were assessed. Both 95% confidence intervals, as well as results of statistical tests (one-sample, two-sample, paired t-test) were provided. RESULTS: After 5 years the implant survival rate was 100% for all 27 implants. In the test group the width of the keratinized mucosa increased significantly over the observation period (0.8 ± 1.0 mm). Concerning aesthetic parameters at the 3-month as well as at the 5-year examination no statistically significant difference could be found between the two groups. In the control-group the papilla mesial and distal to the implant increased statistically significant during the observation period by 0.5 ± 0.5 and 0.4 ± 0.6 index score points, respectively. The position of the gingival margin at the implant site and the two neighboring teeth remained stable. At the 5-year visit IS-BIC measured between 1.4 ± 0.5 mm (mesial, control) and 1.7 ± 0.7 mm (distal, test), no significant difference could be found between the two groups. Over the observation period no statistically significant change of IS-BIC could be found in the test- as well as in the control-group. None of the examined radiographs revealed any signs of retrograde peri-implantitis. CONCLUSION: The replacement of teeth exhibiting periapical pathologies by implants placed immediately after tooth extraction can be a successful treatment modality with no disadvantages in clinical, aesthetical and radiological parameters to immediately placed implants into healthy sockets.

Citations

7 citations in Web of Science®
1 citation in Scopus®
Google Scholar™

Altmetrics

Downloads

127 downloads since deposited on 02 Oct 2012
24 downloads since 12 months
Detailed statistics

Additional indexing

Item Type:Journal Article, refereed, original work
Communities & Collections:04 Faculty of Medicine > Center for Dental Medicine > Clinic for Fixed and Removable Prosthodontics
Dewey Decimal Classification:610 Medicine & health
Language:English
Date:2013
Deposited On:02 Oct 2012 14:19
Last Modified:05 Apr 2016 15:58
Publisher:Wiley-Blackwell
ISSN:0905-7161
Additional Information:The definitive version is available at www.onlinelibrary.wiley.com
Publisher DOI:https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0501.2012.02491.x
PubMed ID:22672584
Permanent URL: https://doi.org/10.5167/uzh-64931

Download

[img]
Preview
Content: Accepted Version
Filetype: PDF
Size: 13MB
View at publisher
[img]
Content: Published Version
Filetype: PDF - Registered users only
Size: 276kB

TrendTerms

TrendTerms displays relevant terms of the abstract of this publication and related documents on a map. The terms and their relations were extracted from ZORA using word statistics. Their timelines are taken from ZORA as well. The bubble size of a term is proportional to the number of documents where the term occurs. Red, orange, yellow and green colors are used for terms that occur in the current document; red indicates high interlinkedness of a term with other terms, orange, yellow and green decreasing interlinkedness. Blue is used for terms that have a relation with the terms in this document, but occur in other documents.
You can navigate and zoom the map. Mouse-hovering a term displays its timeline, clicking it yields the associated documents.

Author Collaborations