TY - JOUR
T1 - A comparative, randomized, prospective, two-center clinical study to evaluate the clinical and esthetic outcomes of two different bone grafting techniques in early implant placement
AU - Mau, Jimmy Lian Ping
AU - Grodin, Evan
AU - Lin, Jung Jen
AU - Chen, Mark Chun Jung
AU - Ho, Chung Han
AU - Cochran, David
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© 2018 American Academy of Periodontology
PY - 2019/3
Y1 - 2019/3
N2 - Background: Early implant placement combined with simultaneous contour augmentation was able to rebuild stable facial hard-tissue and soft-tissue contours that were esthetically pleasing. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the clinical esthetic outcome, when two different bone grafting materials were used. Methods: Forty-eight patients were randomly assigned into two groups. In the control group, autogenous bone was used to cover the exposed implant surface then a layer of deproteinized bovine bone mineral (DBBM) was added. This graft combination was then combined with a collagen membrane. In the test group, the exposed implant surface was covered with a layer of freeze-dried bone allograft (FDBA) in combination with the collagen membrane. Modified plaque index (mPI), modified sulcular bleeding index (mSBI), probing depth (PD), keratinized mucosa (KM), implant crown length (IC), distance from the implant shoulder radiographic bone-to-implant contact (DIB), pink esthetic score (PES), and white esthetic score (WES) were measured at 12-months post implant loading. Results: All 48 implants were clinically successful, and no significant differences were observed in mPI, mSBI, PD, KM, IC, DIB, PES, and WES at 1-year implant loading. The mean mucosal recessions of test and control group were unchanged, 0 and –0.02 mm, respectively. The mean DIB were –0.32 and –0.21 mm in test and control implants, respectively. The mean totals of PES/WES were 15.29 and 15.33 for the test and control groups, respectively, with no significant difference between groups. Conclusion: This study demonstrated that autogenous bone plus DBBM and FDBA each combined with a collagen membrane both resulted in stable clinical and esthetic outcomes in early implant placement with contour augmentation after 1 year.
AB - Background: Early implant placement combined with simultaneous contour augmentation was able to rebuild stable facial hard-tissue and soft-tissue contours that were esthetically pleasing. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the clinical esthetic outcome, when two different bone grafting materials were used. Methods: Forty-eight patients were randomly assigned into two groups. In the control group, autogenous bone was used to cover the exposed implant surface then a layer of deproteinized bovine bone mineral (DBBM) was added. This graft combination was then combined with a collagen membrane. In the test group, the exposed implant surface was covered with a layer of freeze-dried bone allograft (FDBA) in combination with the collagen membrane. Modified plaque index (mPI), modified sulcular bleeding index (mSBI), probing depth (PD), keratinized mucosa (KM), implant crown length (IC), distance from the implant shoulder radiographic bone-to-implant contact (DIB), pink esthetic score (PES), and white esthetic score (WES) were measured at 12-months post implant loading. Results: All 48 implants were clinically successful, and no significant differences were observed in mPI, mSBI, PD, KM, IC, DIB, PES, and WES at 1-year implant loading. The mean mucosal recessions of test and control group were unchanged, 0 and –0.02 mm, respectively. The mean DIB were –0.32 and –0.21 mm in test and control implants, respectively. The mean totals of PES/WES were 15.29 and 15.33 for the test and control groups, respectively, with no significant difference between groups. Conclusion: This study demonstrated that autogenous bone plus DBBM and FDBA each combined with a collagen membrane both resulted in stable clinical and esthetic outcomes in early implant placement with contour augmentation after 1 year.
KW - bone graft
KW - guided bone regeneration
KW - implantology
KW - mucosal recession
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85062282896&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85062282896&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1002/JPER.17-0491
DO - 10.1002/JPER.17-0491
M3 - Article
C2 - 30367723
AN - SCOPUS:85062282896
SN - 0022-3492
VL - 90
SP - 247
EP - 255
JO - Journal of periodontology
JF - Journal of periodontology
IS - 3
ER -