Colorado-Zuluaga J, Tovío-Martínez E, Urbano-del-Valle S

Language: English
References: 15
Page: 22-23
PDF size: 705.22 Kb.

ABSTRACT

Ensuring optimal aesthetic outcomes in dental implant cases within the maxillary anterior area requires careful consideration of socket preservation and atraumatic tooth extraction. These factors play a crucial role in achieving successful and aesthetically pleasing treatments. The objective of this study is to present a series of clinical cases involving dental extractions of anterior maxillary teeth with a poor prognosis. This study highlights the importance of socket preservation and atraumatic tooth extraction in ensuring optimal aesthetic results in dental implant cases within the maxillary anterior area. In these cases, a two-armed lever technique was planned for atraumatic alveolar preservation during the extraction process.Following the tooth extraction, the fresh socket was reclassified, and dental implants were subsequently placed using a modified drilling technique in certain cases. The authors assessed the primary stability of the implants, while in other cases, bone regeneration procedures were performed. The presented clinical cases demonstrate the successful implementation of the two-armed lever technique for atraumatic alveolar preservation, leading to favorable outcomes in terms of primary implant stability and bone preservation. Techniques for bone preservation after tooth extraction aim to minimize post-extraction bone resorption. By implementing appropriate protocols, such as the concept of the dual zone and the two-armed lever technique, successful outcomes can be achieved in terms of both aesthetics and preservation of the alveolar bone.

REFERENCES

1. Elian N., Cho S.C., Froum S., Smith R.B., Tarnow D.P. A simplified socket classification and repair technique. Pract Proced Aesthet Dent. 2007; 19 (2): 99-104.

2. Juodzbalys G., Stumbras A., Goyushov S., Duruel O., Tözüm T.F. Morphological Classification of Extraction Sockets and Clinical Decision Tree for Socket Preservation/Augmentation after Tooth Extraction: a Systematic Review. J Oral Maxillofac Res. 2019; 10 (3): e3. doi:10.5037/jomr.2019.10303.

3. Gomez-Meda R., Esquivel J., Blatz M.B. The esthetic biological contour concept for implant restoration emergence profile design. J Esthet Restor Dent. 2021; 33 (1): 173-184. doi:10.1111/jerd.12714.

4. Gamborena I., Sasaki Y., Blatz M.B. Transmucosal abutments in the esthetic zone: Surgical and prosthetic considerations. J Esthet Restor Dent. 2023; 35 (1): 148-157. doi:10.1111/jerd.13006

5. Testori T., Weinstein T., Scutellà F., Wang H.L., Zucchelli G. Implant placement in the esthetic area: criteria for positioning single and multiple implants. Periodontol 2000. 2018; 77 (1): 176-196. doi:10.1111/prd.12211

6. Gamborena I., Sasaki Y., Blatz M.B. Predictable immediate implant placement and restoration in the esthetic zone. J Esthet Restor Dent. 2021; 33 (1): 158-172. doi:10.1111/jerd.12716

7. Evian C.I., Waasdorp J.A., Ishii M., Mandracchia M., Sanavi F., Rosenberg E.S. Evaluating extraction sockets in the esthetic zone for immediate implant placement. Compend Contin Educ Dent. 2011; 32 (3): e58-65.

8. ElAskary A., Elfana A., Meabed M., Abd-ElWahab Radi I., Akram M., Fawzy El-Sayed K. Immediate implant placement utilizing vestibular socket therapy versus early implant placement with contour augmentation for rehabilitation of compromised extraction sockets in the esthetic zone: A randomized controlled clinical trial. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res. 2022; 24 (5): 559-568. doi:10.1111/cid.13120

9. Abdullah A.H., Abdel Gaber H.K., Adel-Khattab D. Evaluation of soft tissue and labial plate of bone stability with immediate implant in direct contact versus gap with socket shield: A randomized clinical trial with 1 year follow-up. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res. 2022; 24 (5): 548-558. doi:10.1111/cid.13117

10. Wanis R.W., Hosny M.M., ElNahass H. Clinical evaluation of the buccal aspect around immediate implant using dual zone therapeutic concept versus buccal gap fill tobone level: A randomized controlled clinical trial. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res. 2022; 24 (3): 307-319. doi:10.1111/cid.13091

11. Song S.J., Chu S.M., Chu S.J., Saito H., Levin B.P., Egbert N.L., Sarnachiaro G.O., Tarnow D.P. A comparative analysis of dual-axis implants placed into maxillary anterior extraction sockets versus virtual planning with uniaxial implants: A simulated cone beam computed tomography study of implant length and diameter. J Esthet Restor Dent. 2023; 35 (1): 206-214. doi:10.1111/jerd.13011

12. Chu S.J., Östman P.O., Nicolopoulos C., Yuvanoglu P., Chow J., Nevins M., Tarnow D.P. Prospective Multicenter Clinical Cohort Study of a Novel Macro Hybrid Implant in Maxillary Anterior Postextraction Sockets: 1-Year Results. Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent. 2018; 38: s17-s27. doi:10.11607/prd.3987

13. Seyssens L., De Lat L., Cosyn J. Immediate implant placement with or without connective tissue graft: A systematic review and meta-analysis. J Clin Periodontol. 2021; 48 (2): 284-301. doi:10.1111/jcpe.13397

14. Feher B., Frommlet F., Ulm C., Gruber R., Kuchler U. Preoperative buccal bone volume predicts long-term graft retention following augmentation in the esthetic zone: A retrospective case series. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2022; 33 (5): 492-500. doi:10.1111/clr.13909

15. Mesa D., Espinosa Y., Garcia I. Reflexiones sobre bioética médica. Rev. Méd Electrón. 2022. 44 (2): 413-424.