dc.creatorJonker, Brend P.
dc.creatorStrauss Avendaño, Franz Josef
dc.creatorNaenni, Nadja
dc.creatorJung, Ronald E.
dc.creatorWolvius, Eppo B.
dc.creatorPijpe, Justin
dc.date.accessioned2021-12-07T18:32:20Z
dc.date.accessioned2022-01-27T22:43:05Z
dc.date.available2021-12-07T18:32:20Z
dc.date.available2022-01-27T22:43:05Z
dc.date.created2021-12-07T18:32:20Z
dc.date.issued2021
dc.identifierClin Oral Impl Res. 2021;32:1041–1051.
dc.identifier10.1111/clr.13796
dc.identifierhttps://repositorio.uchile.cl/handle/2250/183109
dc.identifier.urihttp://repositorioslatinoamericanos.uchile.cl/handle/2250/3319269
dc.description.abstractObjectives: To test whether early implant placement with alveolar ridge preservation (ARP) results in different esthetic, clinical and patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) compared with early implant placement without ARP. Material and methods: Seventy-five patients requiring single tooth extraction in the anterior maxilla were recruited. Following tooth extraction, the patients were randomly allocated to three groups: (a) ARP using demineralized bovine bone mineral containing 10% collagen (DBBM-C) covered by a collagen matrix (CM) (n = 25), (b) ARP using DBBM-C covered with a palatal graft (PG) (n = 25) and (c) spontaneous healing (control) (n = 25). Eight weeks after tooth extraction, a CBCT was taken and early implant placement was performed in all patients. Esthetic, clinical and PROMs were evaluated one year post-loading. Results: A total of 70 patients were available for re-examination at one year post-loading. The median mid-facial mucosal margin change amounted to −0.02 mm (IQR −0.27–0.46) in the CM group, −0.13 mm (IQR −0.44–0.25) in the PG group and −0.14 mm (IQR −0.29–0.07) in the control group, with no significant differences between the groups. Mean PES scores amounted to 7.0 ± 1.4 in the CM group, 7.1 ± 1.5 in the PG group and 7.3 ± 1.7 in the control group without significant differences between the groups. Plaque, bleeding on probing and probing depth did not differ between treatment groups. PROMs in general revealed no significant differences between the groups. Conclusion: Early implant placement with ARP using either a collagen matrix or a palatal graft rendered similar esthetic, clinical and PROMs to early implant placement without ARP. When a failing tooth can be replaced with an implant within 2 months after tooth extraction, the added value of ARP might be clinically negligible.
dc.languageen
dc.publisherWiley
dc.rightshttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/3.0/us/
dc.rightsAttribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 3.0 United States
dc.sourceClinical Oral Implants Research
dc.subjectAlveolar ridge preservation
dc.subjectClinical trial
dc.subjectEarly implant placement
dc.subjectPatient-centered outcomes
dc.titleEarly implant placement with or without alveolar ridge preservation in single tooth gaps renders similar esthetic, clinical and patient-reported outcome measures: One-year results of a randomized clinical trial
dc.typeArtículos de revistas


Este ítem pertenece a la siguiente institución