Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, University of Groningen, University Medical Center Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands.
Department of Restorative Dentistry, University of Groningen, University Medical Center Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands.
J Clin Periodontol. 2024 Jun;51(6):722-732. doi: 10.1111/jcpe.13971. Epub 2024 Mar 7.
To compare the marginal bone level of immediately placed implants, with either immediate or delayed provisionalization (IP or DP), in the maxillary aesthetic zone after 10 years of function.
Participants with a failing tooth in the maxillary aesthetic zone were randomly assigned to immediate implant placement with either IP (n = 20) or DP (n = 20) after primary wound closure with a free gingival graft. The final restoration was placed 3 months after provisionalization. The primary outcome was change in marginal bone level. In addition, implant survival, restoration survival and success, peri-implant tissue health, mucosa levels, aesthetic indices, buccal bone thickness and patient satisfaction were evaluated.
After 10 years, the mean mesial and distal changes in marginal bone level were -0.47 ± 0.45 mm and -0.49 ± 0.52 mm in the IP group and -0.58 ± 0.76 mm and -0.41 ± 0.72 mm in the DP group (p = .61; p = .71). The survival rate was 100% for the implants; for the restorations, it was 88.9% in the IP group and 87.5% in the DP group. Restoration success, according to modified USPHS criteria, was 77.8% in the IP group and 75.0% in the DP group. The prevalence of peri-implant mucositis was 38.9% and 35.7% and of peri-implantitis 0.0% and 6.3%, respectively, in the IP group and DP group (p = 1.0; p = .40). The Pink Esthetic Score and White Esthetic Score was 15.28 ± 2.32 in the IP group and 14.64 ± 2.74 in the DP group, both clinically acceptable (p = .48). The buccal bone thickness was lower in the DP group. Patient satisfaction was similar in both groups (p = .75).
The mean marginal bone level changes after immediate implant placement with IP were similar to those after immediate placement with DP.
Registered in the National Trial Register (NL9340).
比较上颌美学区即刻植入物的边缘骨水平,这些植入物在初次伤口闭合后立即进行即刻或延迟临时修复(IP 或 DP),并在 10 年后进行功能。
参与者的上颌美学区有一颗失败的牙齿,随机分为两组,一组在初次伤口闭合后立即植入并立即进行临时修复(IP 组,n=20),另一组在初次伤口闭合后立即植入并延迟临时修复(DP 组,n=20),同时进行游离龈移植。临时修复后 3 个月放置最终修复体。主要结局是边缘骨水平的变化。此外,还评估了种植体的存活率、修复体的存活率和成功率、种植体周围组织的健康状况、黏膜水平、美学指数、颊侧骨厚度和患者满意度。
10 年后,IP 组的近中侧和远中侧边缘骨水平平均变化分别为-0.47±0.45mm 和-0.49±0.52mm,DP 组分别为-0.58±0.76mm 和-0.41±0.72mm(p=0.61;p=0.71)。种植体的存活率为 100%;在修复体方面,IP 组为 88.9%,DP 组为 87.5%。根据改良的美国公共卫生服务标准,IP 组的修复体成功率为 77.8%,DP 组为 75.0%。IP 组的种植体周围黏膜炎患病率为 38.9%,种植体周围炎患病率为 0.0%;DP 组的种植体周围黏膜炎患病率为 35.7%,种植体周围炎患病率为 6.3%,两组间差异均无统计学意义(p=1.0;p=0.40)。IP 组的 Pink 美学评分和 White 美学评分为 15.28±2.32,DP 组为 14.64±2.74,均为临床可接受水平(p=0.48)。DP 组的颊侧骨厚度较低。两组患者的满意度相似(p=0.75)。
即刻植入物即刻临时修复(IP)和即刻植入物延迟临时修复(DP)的平均边缘骨水平变化相似。
在荷兰临床试验注册中心(NL9340)注册。