Early implant placement following single-tooth extraction in the esthetic zone: biologic rationale and surgical procedures

Early implant placement is one treatment option for implant therapy following single-tooth extraction in the anterior maxilla. The surgical technique presented here is characterized by tooth extraction without flap elevation, a 4- to 8-week soft tissue healing period, implant placement in a correct three-dimensional position, simultaneous contour augmentation on the facial aspect with guided bone regeneration using a bioabsorbable collagen membrane combined with autogenous bone chips and a low-substitution bone filler, and tension-free primary wound closure. The surgical step-by-step procedure is presented with a case report. In addition, the biologic rationale is discussed.

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.

Success rate of immediate nonfunctional loaded single-tooth implants: Immediate versus delayed implantation

Purpose: The aim of this study was to evaluate the success rate of maxillary immediate nonfunctional single-tooth loaded implants used into fresh extraction sites (immediate placement condition) or healed ridge (delayed placement condition).Materials and Methods: Eighty-two dental implants were placed in the maxilla of 64 consecutive patients from Private practice office and from a specialization course in Implantology. Forty-six implants were inserted under immediate placement condition, and 36 were inserted under delayed placement condition. The criteria used to evaluate success rate were those previously described by Albrektsson and Zarb (Int J Prosthodont 1993;6: 95-105), and follow-up period ranged from 18.0 to 39.7 months.Results: Seventy-nine implants fulfilled the success rate criteria (96.3%). Moreover, differences concerning implantation condition were not significant (P = 0.33, Qui-square test): three of the failed implants were from immediate placement group (success rate of 93.5%), and none was from delayed placement group (success rate of 100.0%).Conclusion: In the present sample, no statistically significant differences were detected for immediate nonfunctional single-tooth loaded implants under immediate placement condition in comparison with those inserted under delayed placement condition; both protocols had high success rate in maxillary incisors, canines, and premolars areas.

Single-step extraction of fluconazole from plasma by ultra-filtration for the measurement of its free concentration by high performance liquid chromatography.

High performance liquid chromatography (HPLC) is the reference method for measuring concentrations of antimicrobials in blood. This technique requires careful sample preparation. Protocols using organic solvents and/or solid extraction phases are time consuming and entail several manipulations, which can lead to partial loss of the determined compound and increased analytical variability. Moreover, to obtain sufficient material for analysis, at least 1 ml of plasma is required. This constraint makes it difficult to determine drug levels when blood sample volumes are limited. However, drugs with low plasma-protein binding can be reliably extracted from plasma by ultra-filtration with a minimal loss due to the protein-bound fraction. This study validated a single-step ultra-filtration method for extracting fluconazole (FLC), a first-line antifungal agent with a weak plasma-protein binding, from plasma to determine its concentration by HPLC. Spiked FLC standards and unknowns were prepared in human and rat plasma. Samples (240 microl) were transferred into disposable microtube filtration units containing cellulose or polysulfone filters with a 5 kDa cut-off. After centrifugation for 60 min at 15000g, FLC concentrations were measured by direct injection of the filtrate into the HPLC. Using cellulose filters, low molecular weight proteins were eluted early in the chromatogram and well separated from FLC that eluted at 8.40 min as a sharp single peak. In contrast, with polysulfone filters several additional peaks interfering with the FLC peak were observed. Moreover, the FLC recovery using cellulose filters compared to polysulfone filters was higher and had a better reproducibility. Cellulose filters were therefore used for the subsequent validation procedure. The quantification limit was 0.195 mgl(-1). Standard curves with a quadratic regression coefficient > or = 0.9999 were obtained in the concentration range of 0.195-100 mgl(-1). The inter and intra-run accuracies and precisions over the clinically relevant concentration range, 1.875-60 mgl(-1), fell well within the +/-15% variation recommended by the current guidelines for the validation of analytical methods. Furthermore, no analytical interference was observed with commonly used antibiotics, antifungals, antivirals and immunosuppressive agents. Ultra-filtration of plasma with cellulose filters permits the extraction of FLC from small volumes (240 microl). The determination of FLC concentrations by HPLC after this single-step procedure is selective, precise and accurate.

Influence of implant positioning in extraction sockets on osseointegration: histomorphometric analyses in dogs

Aim To evaluate the influence of implant positioning into extraction sockets on osseointegration. Material and methods Implants were installed immediately into extraction sockets in the mandibles of six Labrador dogs. In the control sites, the implants were positioned in the center of the alveolus, while in the test sites, the implants were positioned 0.8 mm deeper and more lingually. After 4 months of healing, the resorptive patterns of the alveolar crest were evaluated histomorphometrically. Results All implants were integrated in mineralized bone, mainly composed of mature lamellar bone. The alveolar crest underwent resorption at the control as well as at the test sites. After 4 months of healing, at the buccal aspects of the control and test sites, the location of the implant rough/smooth limit to the alveolar crest was 2 +/- 0.9 mm and 0.6 +/- 0.9 mm, respectively (P < 0.05). At the lingual aspect, the bony crest was located 0.4 mm apically and 0.2 mm coronally to the implant rough/smooth limit at the control and test sites, respectively (NS). Conclusions From a clinical point of view, implants installed into extraction sockets should be positioned approximately 1 mm deeper than the level of the buccal alveolar crest and in a lingual position in relation to the center of the alveolus in order to reduce or eliminate the exposure above the alveolar crest of the endosseous (rough) portion of the implant. To cite this article:Caneva M, Salata LA, de Souza SS, Baffone G, Lang NP, Botticelli D. Influence of implant positioning in extraction sockets on osseointegration: histomorphometric analyses in dogs.Clin. Oral Impl. Res. 21, 2010; 43-49.

Ridge Preservation With Acellular Dermal Matrix and Anorganic Bone Matrix Cell-Binding Peptide P-15 After Tooth Extraction in Humans

Background: Preventing ridge collapse with the extraction of maxillary anterior teeth is vital to an esthetic restorative result. Several regenerative techniques are available and are used for socket preservation. The aim of this study is to analyze by clinical parameters the use of acellular dermal matrix (ADM) and anorganic bovine bone matrix (ABM) with synthetic cell-binding peptide P-15 to preserve alveolar bone after tooth extraction. Methods: Eighteen patients in need of extraction of maxillary anterior teeth were selected and randomly assigned to the test group (ADM plus ABM/P-15) or the control group (ADM only). Clinical measurements were recorded initially and at 6 months after ridge-preservation procedures. Results: In the clinical measurements (external vertical palatal measurement [EVPM], external vertical buccal measurement [EVBM], and alveolar horizontal measurement [AHM]) the statistical analysis showed no difference between test and control groups initially and at 6 months. The intragroup analysis, after 6 months, showed a statistically significant reduction in the measurements for both groups. In the comparison between the two groups, the differences in the test group were as follows: EVPM = 0.83 +/- 1.53 mm; EVBM = 1.20 +/- 2.02 mm; and AHM = 2.53 +/- 1.81 mm. The differences in the control group were as follows: EVPM = 0.87 +/- 1.13 mm; EVBM = 1.50 +/- 1.15 mm; and AHM = 3.40 +/- 1.39 mm. The differences in EVPM and EVBM were not statistically significant; however, in horizontal measurement (AHM), there was a statistically significant difference (P<0.05). Conclusion: The results of this study show that ADM used as membrane associated with ABM/P-15 can be used to reduce buccal-palatal dimensions compared to ADM alone for preservation of the alveolar ridge after extraction of anterior maxillary teeth. J Periodontol 2011;82:72-79.

Action of nicotine and ovariectomy on bone regeneration after tooth extraction in rats

Purpose: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the effects of nicotine and ovariectomy on alveolar bone regeneration after exodontias in rats.Materials and Methods: For 30 days, sham ovariectomized (OVX)/NaCl, sham OVX/nicotine, OVX/NaCl, and OVX/nicotine animals were given 2 daily injections of saline or hemisulfate of nicotine. After this period, exodontic procedures were carried out and treatment continued up to the time of euthanasia on clays 7 and 14 when the alveoli were removed for further analyses.Results: The data confirmed that nicotine significantly delays the alveolar regeneration process after dental extraction in rats and showed that the association of nicotine with ovariectomy exacerbates these results.Conclusion: These results indicate that nicotine potentiated the effect of estrogen deficiency on bone regeneration induced by ovariectomy. (c) 2010 American Association of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgeons Oral Maxillofac Surg 68:2675-2681, 2010

Gingival Papilla Dimensions in Anterosuperior Regions Adjacent to Single-Tooth Implants

This study compared the dimensions of gingival papillae in anterosuperior areas presenting at natural teeth (teeth sites) or single-tooth implants adjacent to natural teeth (implant-tooth sites) by analyzing determined distances. A total of 45 teeth and 46 implant-tooth sites were carefully selected. Clinical evaluation consisted of visual and quantitative analyses with millimeter grids on radiographs. Implant-tooth sites showed a smaller gingival papilla dimension than tooth sites (P < .01). Both evaluated distances (contact point to bone crest and between the roots of adjacent teeth or implant platform to root of adjacent tooth) in all groups significantly influenced the presence/absence of gingival papillae (P < .01). (Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent 2012;32:93-100.)