IADR Abstract Archives
Aesthetic Research of Anterior Maxillary Immediate Implant Placement and Provisionalization
Objectives: To explore the clinical and esthetic outcome of immediate implant placement and provisionalization (IIPP) of anterior maxillary implants by evaluating hard and soft tissue parameters and patients’ satisfaction.
Methods: Fifteen patients were recruited in our prospective study. Nineteen upper anterior teeth with complete facial bones were treated for single-tooth replacement by means of IIPP. Clinical and radiographic evaluation was completed immediately after IIPP (T1) and 6 months after surgery (T2) to assess implant survival and complications, horizontal and vertical dimensional changes of facial bone, pink esthetic scores (PES) and papilla index scores (PIS). At the latest follow-up, the patients’ esthetic satisfaction had also been evaluated. Additionally, we had obeserved the advantages of the definitive abutment and the provisional crown. The data were analyzed statistically at a significance level of P = 0.05.
Results: After a mean follow-up time of 12.7 months (range, 6 to 21months), all implants remained in function. Incidents of loosening of the provisional crown or the definitive abutment occurred in 47.4% of all the cases. The average change of horizontal facial bone thickness was 0.74mm while that of vertical facial bone level was 1.16mm. Dimensional changes of facial bone between T1 and T2 were significant. There was also a significant difference of PES value from T1 (PES = 10.53) to T2 (PES = 11.89). The average score of patients’ esthetic satisfaction was 89.80. In the patients’ group using the definitive abutment, the scores of satisfaction were significantly higher than those without the definitive abutment.
Conclusions: Favorable implant success rates and predictable esthetic outcomes can be achieved with this IIPP procedure in well-selected patients. The provisional crown can be the support of the gingival margin and provides soft tissue maintenance in maxillary anterior region.
Methods: Fifteen patients were recruited in our prospective study. Nineteen upper anterior teeth with complete facial bones were treated for single-tooth replacement by means of IIPP. Clinical and radiographic evaluation was completed immediately after IIPP (T1) and 6 months after surgery (T2) to assess implant survival and complications, horizontal and vertical dimensional changes of facial bone, pink esthetic scores (PES) and papilla index scores (PIS). At the latest follow-up, the patients’ esthetic satisfaction had also been evaluated. Additionally, we had obeserved the advantages of the definitive abutment and the provisional crown. The data were analyzed statistically at a significance level of P = 0.05.
Results: After a mean follow-up time of 12.7 months (range, 6 to 21months), all implants remained in function. Incidents of loosening of the provisional crown or the definitive abutment occurred in 47.4% of all the cases. The average change of horizontal facial bone thickness was 0.74mm while that of vertical facial bone level was 1.16mm. Dimensional changes of facial bone between T1 and T2 were significant. There was also a significant difference of PES value from T1 (PES = 10.53) to T2 (PES = 11.89). The average score of patients’ esthetic satisfaction was 89.80. In the patients’ group using the definitive abutment, the scores of satisfaction were significantly higher than those without the definitive abutment.
Conclusions: Favorable implant success rates and predictable esthetic outcomes can be achieved with this IIPP procedure in well-selected patients. The provisional crown can be the support of the gingival margin and provides soft tissue maintenance in maxillary anterior region.
2120978_File000000.jpg