Early implant placement with simultaneous guided bone regeneration following single-tooth extraction in the esthetic zone: a cross-sectional, retrospective study in 45 subjects with a 2- to 4-year follow-up

BACKGROUND: The concept of early implant placement is a treatment option in postextraction sites of single teeth in the anterior maxilla. Implant placement is performed after a soft tissue healing period of 4 to 8 weeks. Implant placement in a correct three-dimensional position is combined with a simultaneous guided bone regeneration procedure to rebuild esthetic facial hard and soft tissue contours. METHODS: In this retrospective, cross-sectional study, 45 patients with an implant-borne single crown in function for 2 to 4 years were recalled for examination. Clinical and radiologic parameters, routinely used in implant studies, were assessed. RESULTS: All 45 implants were clinically successful according to strict success criteria. The implants demonstrated ankylotic stability without signs of a peri-implant infection. The peri-implant soft tissues were clinically healthy as indicated by low mean plaque (0.42) and sulcus bleeding index (0.51) values. None of the implants revealed a mucosal recession on the facial aspect as confirmed by a clearly submucosal position of all implant shoulders. The mean distance from the mucosal margin to the implant shoulder was -1.93 mm on the facial aspect. The periapical radiographs showed stable peri-implant bone levels, with a mean distance between the implant shoulder and the first bone-implant contact of 2.18 mm. CONCLUSIONS: This retrospective study demonstrated successful treatment outcomes for all 45 implants examined. The mid-term follow-up of 2 to 4 years also showed that the risk for mucosal recession was low with this treatment concept. Prospective clinical studies are required to confirm these encouraging results.

Early implant placement with simultaneous guided bone regeneration following single-tooth extraction in the esthetic zone: 12-month results of a prospective study with 20 consecutive patients

BACKGROUND: Early implant placement is one of the treatment options in postextraction sites in the anterior maxilla. Implant placement is performed after a soft tissue healing period of 4 to 8 weeks. Implant placement is combined with a simultaneous guided bone regeneration (GBR) procedure to rebuild esthetic facial hard and soft tissue contours. METHODS: In this prospective case-series study, 20 consecutive patients treated with an implant-borne single crown were prospectively followed for 12 months. Clinical, radiologic, and esthetic parameters were recorded to assess treatment outcomes. RESULTS: At the 12-month examination, all 20 implants were successfully integrated, demonstrating ankylotic stability and healthy peri-implant soft tissues as documented by standard parameters. The esthetic outcomes assessed by a pink esthetic score (PES) and a white esthetic score (WES) demonstrated pleasing results overall. The WES values were slightly superior to the PES values. The periapical radiographs showed minimal crestal bone loss around the used bone level implants, with mean bone loss of 0.18 mm at 12 months. Only one implant showed >0.5 mm bone loss, combined with minor mucosal recession of 0.5 to 1.0 mm. CONCLUSIONS: This prospective case series study evaluating the concept of early implant placement demonstrated successful tissue integration for all 20 implants. The short-term follow-up of 12 months revealed pleasing esthetic outcomes overall, as assessed by objective parameters. The risk for mucosal recession was low; only one patient showed minor recession of the facial mucosa. These encouraging results need to be confirmed with 3- and 5-year follow-up examinations.

Long-term stability of contour augmentation with early implant placement following single tooth extraction in the esthetic zone: a prospective, cross-sectional study in 41 patients with a 5- to 9-year follow-up

BACKGROUND Early implant placement with simultaneous contour augmentation is documented with short- and medium-term studies. The long-term stability of contour augmentation is uncertain. METHODS In this prospective, cross-sectional study, 41 patients with an implant-borne single crown were examined twice, in 2006 and 2010. Clinical, radiologic, and esthetic parameters were assessed at both examinations. In addition, a cone beam computed tomographic (CBCT) image was obtained during the second examination to assess the dimensions of the facial bone wall. RESULTS All 41 implants demonstrated ankylotic stability without signs of peri-implant infection at both examinations. The clinical parameters remained stable over time. Satisfactory esthetic outcomes were noted, as assessed by the pink and white esthetic score (PES/WES) indices. Overall, the PES scores were slightly higher than the WES scores. None of the implants developed mucosal recession over time, as confirmed by values of the distance between implant shoulder and mucosal margin and cast measurements. The periapical radiographs yielded stable peri-implant bone levels, with a mean distance between implant shoulder and first visible bone-implant contact value of 2.18 mm. The CBCT analysis demonstrated a mean thickness of the facial bone wall ≈2.2 mm. In two implants (4.9%) no facial bone wall was detectable radiographically. CONCLUSIONS This prospective cross-sectional study demonstrates stable peri-implant hard and soft tissues for all 41 implants examined and satisfactory esthetic outcomes overall. The follow-up of 5 to 9 years confirmed again that the risk for mucosal recession is low with early implant placement. In addition, contour augmentation with guided bone regeneration was able to establish and maintain a facial bone wall in 95% of patients.

[Anterior teeth esthetics with the SPI implant system]

Replacement of maxillary front teeth with a fixed, implant supported partial denture with a high laugh line is a demanding procedure. For an optimal esthetic result, no deficiency of bone or soft tissue is acceptable. Submerged implant healing has often been recommended for better predictability in esthetically demanding situations. This case report shows the rehabilitation with a fixed implant supported reconstruction in the upper front and a single implant supported crown in the premolar region. Teeth had to be extracted because of apical lesions, periodontal the gingiva. The technique of delayed, submerged implant placement in the region of 11, 21 and 22 was applied and in the region of 15 a transmucosal implant healing. With a fixed, implant supported partial denture the mucosa in the upper front was conditioned. Ten months after implantation the definitive screwed, fixed partial denture on SPI ELEMENT implants was successfully integrated. In the region 15 a single crown transversally screwed was fixed on a SPI ONE TIME implant. Radiographic data two years after implantation showed a well established periimplant crestal bone level. No prosthetic complications had occurred since the insertion of the reconstruction twelve months ago.

Zirconia for teeth and implants

This case series reports on the use of nonsilica-based high-strength full ceramics for different prosthetic indications. Fifty-two consecutive patients received tooth- or implant-supported zirconia reconstructions during a 2-year period. The observation period for reexamination was 12 to 30 months. The most frequent indications were single crowns and short-span fixed partial dentures. A few implant superstructures were screw-retained, whereas all remaining restorations were cemented on natural teeth or zirconia implant abutments. Clinical examination included biologic (probing depths, bleeding on probing) and esthetic (Papilla Index) parameters, as well as technical complications. No implant was lost or caused any problems, but two teeth were lost after horizontal fracture. Overall, the periodontal parameters were favorable. Fractures of frameworks or implant abutments were not observed. Abutment-screw loosening occurred once for one premolar single crown. Furthermore, five implant crowns in the posterior region exhibited chipping of the porcelain veneering material. With regard to esthetics, no reconstructions were considered unacceptable, but three crowns were remade shortly after delivery. In this short-term study, it was observed that biologic, esthetic, and mechanical properties of zirconia were favorable, and the material could be used in various prosthetic indications on teeth or implants.

Long-term stability of early implant placement with contour augmentation

In this prospective case series study, 20 patients with an implant-borne single crown following early implant placement with simultaneous contour augmentation were followed for 6 years. Clinical, radiologic, and esthetic parameters were assessed. In addition, cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) was used at 6 years to examine the facial bone wall. During the study period, all 20 implants were successfully integrated, and the clinical parameters remained stable over time. Pleasing esthetic outcomes were noted, as assessed by the pink esthetic scores. None of the implants developed mucosal recession of 1 mm or more. The periapical radiographs yielded stable peri-implant bone levels, with a mean DIB of 0.44 mm at 6 years. The CBCT scans showed that all 20 implants had a detectable facial bone wall at 6 years, with a mean thickness of around 1.9 mm. In summary, this prospective case series study demonstrated stable peri-implant hard and soft tissues for all 20 implants, and pleasing esthetic outcomes overall. The follow-up of 6 years confirmed that the risk for mucosal recession is low with early implant placement. In addition, contour augmentation with guided bone regeneration (GBR) was able to establish and maintain a facial bone wall in all 20 patients.

Sinus floor elevation: comparison of the presurgical ridge height of different techniques - a retrospective analysis.

Purpose: Radiographic evaluation of the vertical presurgical ridge height (PRH) of implants, placed using the transcrestal or lateral window sinus floor elevation (SFE) technique in edentulous and partially dentate patients. The 5-year implant survival rate and the prosthetic restoration following the SFE procedure were also evaluated. Methods: Radiographs of 83 tapered implants placed in 53 patients were available for analysis. 31 implants were placed by the transcrestal and 52 were placed by the lateral window technique. In the lateral window technique 21 implants were placed simultaneously, 31 in a staged approach. The PRH, the implant survival rate after five years and the prosthetic restoration were evaluated with respect to the chosen SFE procedure. Results: The PRH was significantly higher for the transcrestal than both lateral window techniques, mean values: 8.0 ± 2.7 mm (transcrestal); 4.2 ± 2.6 mm (lateral simultaneous); 4.5 ± 2.8 mm (lateral staged). There was no significant difference of PRH between the edentulous and partially dentate patients. All loaded implants were stable, resulting in a 100% implant survival rate after 5 years. There was a small overproportion of single crown restorations in the transcrestal SFE technique group. Conclusion: This study confirms that the transcrestal technique is chosen, when a higher PRH is available. The choice of a simultaneous or staged lateral window approach is mainly dependent on the expected primary stability of the implant and not only on the PRH. SFE procedures are a safe and predictable treatment option to place implants in the vertical atrophic maxilla.

A 10-year retrospective analysis of radiographic bone-level changes of implants supporting single-unit crowns in periodontally compromised vs. periodontally healthy patients

AIM: To compare the 10-year peri-implant bone loss (BL) rate in periodontally compromised (PCP) and periodontally healthy patients (PHP) around two different implant systems supporting single-unit crowns. MATERIALS AND METHODS: In this retrospective, controlled study, the mean BL (mBL) rate around dental implants placed in four groups of 20 non-smokers was evaluated after a follow-up of 10 years. Two groups of patients treated for periodontitis (PCP) and two groups of PHP were created. For each category (PCP and PHP), two different types of implant had been selected. The mBL was calculated by subtracting the radiographic bone levels at the time of crown cementation from the bone levels at the 10-year follow-up. RESULTS: The mean age, mean full-mouth plaque and full-mouth bleeding scores and implant location were similar between the four groups. Implant survival rates ranged between 85% and 95%, without statistically significant differences (P>0.05) between groups. For both implant systems, PCP showed statistically significantly higher mBL rates and number of sites with BL> or =3 mm compared with PHP (P<0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: After 10 years, implants in PCP yielded lower survival rates and higher mean marginal BL rates compared with those of implants placed in PHP. These results were independent of the implant system used or the healing modality applied.

Five-year results of a randomized controlled clinical trial comparing zirconia and titanium abutments supporting single-implant crowns in canine and posterior regions

OBJECTIVES: To test the survival rates, and the technical and biological complication rates of customized zirconia and titanium abutments 5 years after crown insertion. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Twenty-two patients with 40 single implants in maxillary and mandibular canine and posterior regions were included. The implant sites were randomly assigned to zirconia abutments supporting all-ceramic crowns or titanium abutments supporting metal-ceramic crowns. Clinical examinations were performed at baseline, and at 6, 12, 36 and 60 months of follow-up. The abutments and reconstructions were examined for technical and/or biological complications. Probing pocket depth (PPD), plaque control record (PCR) and Bleeding on Probing (BOP) were assessed at abutments (test) and analogous contralateral teeth (control). Radiographs of the implants revealed the bone level (BL) on mesial (mBL) and distal sides (dBL). Data were statistically analyzed with nonparametric mixed models provided by Brunner and Langer and STATA (P < 0.05). RESULTS: Eighteen patients with 18 zirconia and 10 titanium abutments were available at a mean follow-up of 5.6 years (range 4.5-6.3 years). No abutment fracture or loss of a reconstruction occurred. Hence, the survival rate was 100% for both. Survival of implants supporting zirconia abutments was 88.9% and 90% for implants supporting titanium abutments. Chipping of the veneering ceramic occurred at three metal-ceramic crowns supported by titanium abutments. No significant differences were found at the zirconia and titanium abutments for PPD (meanPPD(ZrO2) 3.3 ± 0.6 mm, mPPD(T) (i) 3.6 ± 1.1 mm), PCR (mPCR(Z) (rO) (2) 0.1 ± 0.3, mPCR(T) (i) 0.3 ± 0.2) and BOP (mBOP(Z) (rO) (2) 0.5 ± 0.3, mBOP(T) (i) 0.6 ± 0.3). Moreover, the BL was similar at implants supporting zirconia and titanium abutments (mBL(Z) (rO) (2) 1.8 ± 0.5, dBL(Z) (rO) (2) 2.0 ± 0.8; mBL(T) (i) 2.0 ± 0.8, dBL(T) (i) 1.9 ± 0.8). CONCLUSIONS: There were no statistically or clinically relevant differences between the 5-year survival rates, and the technical and biological complication rates of zirconia and titanium abutments in posterior regions.

Clinical outcome of single porcelain-fused-to-zirconium dioxide crowns: a systematic review

STATEMENT OF PROBLEM The increasing demand by patients for esthetic and metal-free restorations has driven the development of ceramic restorations with good esthetic and mechanical stability. Recent clinical studies have investigated the use of zirconium dioxide as a core material for complete crowns and computer-aided-design/computer-aided-manufacturing fabricated restorations. PURPOSE The aim of this systematic review was to evaluate the clinical survival rates of porcelain-fused-to-zirconia (PFZ) single crowns on anterior and posterior teeth and to compare them with metal ceramic (MC) crowns. MATERIAL AND METHODS A systematic search was conducted with PubMed and manual research to identify literature written in English that refers to in vivo studies published from January 1, 1950 through July 1, 2011. Clinical trials that evaluated PFZ and MC single crowns on natural teeth were selected for further analysis. Titles and/or abstracts of articles identified through the electronic searches were reviewed and evaluated for appropriateness. In addition, a hand search of relevant dental journals was peformed, and reference lists of culled articles were screened to identify publications. RESULTS The search resulted in a total of 488 initial matches. Nineteen studies with a total of 3621 crowns met the inclusion criteria. The survival rates of PFZ crowns (total 300) ranged from 92.7% to 100% for a follow-up time of 24 to 39 months, whereas those of MC crowns (total 3321) ranged from 70% to 100% for a follow-up time of 12 to 298 months. Studies that reported long-term results were found only for the MC crown group. CONCLUSIONS The scientific clinical data available to compare PFZ and MC crowns are limited. The survival rates may well be influenced by the selection and appropriate use of the veneering ceramic, and, therefore, additional prospective long-term clinical trials are necessary to draw reliable conclusions.

Complete digital workflow for the production of implant-supported single-unit monolithic crowns.

OBJECTIVES The aim of this case series was to introduce a complete digital workflow for the production of monolithic implant crowns. MATERIAL AND METHODS Six patients were treated with implant-supported crowns made of resin nano ceramic (RNC). Starting with an intraoral optical scan (IOS), and following a CAD/CAM process, the monolithic crowns were bonded either to a novel prefabricated titanium abutment base (group A) or to a CAD/CAM-generated individualized titanium abutment (group B) in premolar or molar sites on a soft tissue level dental implant. Economic analyses included clinical and laboratory steps. An esthetic evaluation was performed to compare the two abutment-crown combinations. RESULTS None of the digitally constructed RNC crowns required any clinical adaptation. Overall mean work time calculations revealed obvious differences for group A (65.3 min) compared with group B (86.5 min). Esthetic analysis demonstrated a more favorable outcome for the prefabricated bonding bases. CONCLUSIONS Prefabricated or individualized abutments on monolithic RNC crowns using CAD/CAM technology in a model-free workflow seem to provide a feasible and streamlined treatment approach for single-edentulous space rehabilitation in the posterior region. However, RNC as full-contour material has to be considered experimental, and further large-scale clinical investigations with long-term follow-up observation are necessary.

All-ceramic or metal-ceramic tooth-supported fixed dental prostheses (FDPs)? A systematic review of the survival and complication rates. Part I: Single crowns (SCs).

OBJECTIVE To assess the 5-year survival of metal-ceramic and all-ceramic tooth-supported single crowns (SCs) and to describe the incidence of biological, technical and esthetic complications. METHODS Medline (PubMed), Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) searches (2006-2013) were performed for clinical studies focusing on tooth-supported fixed dental prostheses (FDPs) with a mean follow-up of at least 3 years. This was complimented by an additional hand search and the inclusion of 34 studies from a previous systematic review [1,2]. Survival and complication rates were analyzed using robust Poisson's regression models to obtain summary estimates of 5-year proportions. RESULTS Sixty-seven studies reporting on 4663 metal-ceramic and 9434 all-ceramic SCs fulfilled the inclusion criteria. Seventeen studies reported on metal-ceramic crowns, and 54 studies reported on all-ceramic crowns. Meta-analysis of the included studies indicated an estimated survival rate of metal-ceramic SCs of 94.7% (95% CI: 94.1-96.9%) after 5 years. This was similar to the estimated 5-year survival rate of leucit or lithium-disilicate reinforced glass ceramic SCs (96.6%; 95% CI: 94.9-96.7%), of glass infiltrated alumina SCs (94.6%; 95% CI: 92.7-96%) and densely sintered alumina and zirconia SCs (96%; 95% CI: 93.8-97.5%; 92.1%; 95% CI: 82.8-95.6%). In contrast, the 5-year survival rates of feldspathic/silica-based ceramic crowns were lower (p<0.001). When the outcomes in anterior and posterior regions were compared feldspathic/silica-based ceramic and zirconia crowns exhibited significantly lower survival rates in the posterior region (p<0.0001), the other crown types performed similarly. Densely sintered zirconia SCs were more frequently lost due to veneering ceramic fractures than metal-ceramic SCs (p<0.001), and had significantly more loss of retention (p<0.001). In total higher 5 year rates of framework fracture were reported for the all-ceramic SCs than for metal-ceramic SCs. CONCLUSIONS Survival rates of most types of all-ceramic SCs were similar to those reported for metal-ceramic SCs, both in anterior and posterior regions. Weaker feldspathic/silica-based ceramics should be limited to applications in the anterior region. Zirconia-based SCs should not be considered as primary option due to their high incidence of technical problems.

Single crowns versus conventional fillings for the restoration of root-filled teeth.

BACKGROUND Endodontic treatment involves removal of the dental pulp and its replacement by a root canal filling. Restoration of root filled teeth can be challenging due to structural differences between vital and non-vital root-filled teeth. Direct restoration involves placement of a restorative material e.g. amalgam or composite, directly into the tooth. Indirect restorations consist of cast metal or ceramic (porcelain) crowns. The choice of restoration depends on the amount of remaining tooth, and may influence durability and cost. The decision to use a post and core in addition to the crown is clinician driven. The comparative clinical performance of crowns or conventional fillings used to restore root-filled teeth is unknown. This review updates the original, which was published in 2012. OBJECTIVES To assess the effects of restoration of endodontically treated teeth (with or without post and core) by crowns versus conventional filling materials. SEARCH METHODS We searched the following databases: the Cochrane Oral Health Group's Trials Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE via OVID, EMBASE via OVID, CINAHL via EBSCO, LILACS via BIREME. We also searched the reference lists of articles and ongoing trials registries.There were no restrictions regarding language or date of publication. The search is up-to-date as of 26 March 2015. SELECTION CRITERIA Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) or quasi-randomised controlled trials in participants with permanent teeth that have undergone endodontic treatment. Single full coverage crowns compared with any type of filling materials for direct restoration or indirect partial restorations (e.g. inlays and onlays). Comparisons considered the type of post and core used (cast or prefabricated post), if any. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS Two review authors independently extracted data from the included trial and assessed its risk of bias. We carried out data analysis using the 'treatment as allocated' patient population, expressing estimates of intervention effect for dichotomous data as risk ratios, with 95% confidence intervals (CI). MAIN RESULTS We included one trial, which was judged to be at high risk of performance, detection and attrition bias. The 117 participants with a root-filled, premolar tooth restored with a carbon fibre post, were randomised to either a full coverage metal-ceramic crown or direct adhesive composite restoration. None experienced a catastrophic failure (i.e. when the restoration cannot be repaired), although only 104 teeth were included in the final, three-year assessment. There was no clear difference between the crown and composite group and the composite only group for non-catastrophic failures of the restoration (1/54 versus 3/53; RR 0.33; 95% CI 0.04 to 3.05) or failures of the post (2/54 versus 1/53; RR 1.96; 95% CI 0.18 to 21.01) at three years. The quality of the evidence for these outcomes is very low. There was no evidence available for any of our secondary outcomes: patient satisfaction and quality of life, incidence or recurrence of caries, periodontal health status, and costs. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS There is insufficient evidence to assess the effects of crowns compared to conventional fillings for the restoration of root-filled teeth. Until more evidence becomes available, clinicians should continue to base decisions about how to restore root-filled teeth on their own clinical experience, whilst taking into consideration the individual circumstances and preferences of their patients.