Xingfu Li, Xinhan Li, Yamei Xu, Gang Fu, Hong Huang
{"title":"在前牙中比较改良的窝沟封闭技术和传统的即刻种植技术:一项为期 5 年的回顾性临床研究。","authors":"Xingfu Li, Xinhan Li, Yamei Xu, Gang Fu, Hong Huang","doi":"10.1111/clr.14281","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Aims</h3>\n \n <p>The aim of this retrospective clinical study was to compare the 5-year radiological and clinical outcomes of patients undergoing immediate implantation with or without the modified socket-shield technique.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Materials and Methods</h3>\n \n <p>Patients who underwent anterior tooth replacement via the modified socket-shield technique (MSST) or the conventional immediate implantation technique (CIIT) between 2016 and 2017 were included. The labial bone thickness was assessed at different measurement levels (0, 2, 4 and 6 mm apical to the implant shoulder (IS)) postoperatively (T1), 6 months postoperatively (T2) and 5 years postoperatively (T3). The pink aesthetic score (PES) was evaluated before surgery (T0) and at T2 and T3. Implant success, complications and patient satisfaction were evaluated at every visit.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Results</h3>\n \n <p>Thirty-six patients (18 in the MSST group) underwent follow-up for 5 years, with no cases of implant failure. Two cases of exposure were detected in the MSST group, but there were no significant effects on hard or soft tissue. Patients in the MSST group showed less and more stable bone resorption than did those in the CIIT group at any measurement level and any time. A higher PES was achieved in the MSST group. Patient satisfaction was similar in both groups.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Conclusions</h3>\n \n <p>The MSST is a reliable immediate implantation method because of its ability to preserve the alveolar bone and provide superior recovery of aesthetics.</p>\n </section>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":10455,"journal":{"name":"Clinical Oral Implants Research","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":4.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-05-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Comparing the modified socket-shield technique with the conventional immediate implantation technique in the anterior dentition: A 5-year retrospective clinical study\",\"authors\":\"Xingfu Li, Xinhan Li, Yamei Xu, Gang Fu, Hong Huang\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/clr.14281\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div>\\n \\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Aims</h3>\\n \\n <p>The aim of this retrospective clinical study was to compare the 5-year radiological and clinical outcomes of patients undergoing immediate implantation with or without the modified socket-shield technique.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Materials and Methods</h3>\\n \\n <p>Patients who underwent anterior tooth replacement via the modified socket-shield technique (MSST) or the conventional immediate implantation technique (CIIT) between 2016 and 2017 were included. The labial bone thickness was assessed at different measurement levels (0, 2, 4 and 6 mm apical to the implant shoulder (IS)) postoperatively (T1), 6 months postoperatively (T2) and 5 years postoperatively (T3). The pink aesthetic score (PES) was evaluated before surgery (T0) and at T2 and T3. Implant success, complications and patient satisfaction were evaluated at every visit.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Results</h3>\\n \\n <p>Thirty-six patients (18 in the MSST group) underwent follow-up for 5 years, with no cases of implant failure. Two cases of exposure were detected in the MSST group, but there were no significant effects on hard or soft tissue. Patients in the MSST group showed less and more stable bone resorption than did those in the CIIT group at any measurement level and any time. A higher PES was achieved in the MSST group. Patient satisfaction was similar in both groups.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Conclusions</h3>\\n \\n <p>The MSST is a reliable immediate implantation method because of its ability to preserve the alveolar bone and provide superior recovery of aesthetics.</p>\\n </section>\\n </div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":10455,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Clinical Oral Implants Research\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-05-15\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Clinical Oral Implants Research\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"5\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/clr.14281\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Clinical Oral Implants Research","FirstCategoryId":"5","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/clr.14281","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
Comparing the modified socket-shield technique with the conventional immediate implantation technique in the anterior dentition: A 5-year retrospective clinical study
Aims
The aim of this retrospective clinical study was to compare the 5-year radiological and clinical outcomes of patients undergoing immediate implantation with or without the modified socket-shield technique.
Materials and Methods
Patients who underwent anterior tooth replacement via the modified socket-shield technique (MSST) or the conventional immediate implantation technique (CIIT) between 2016 and 2017 were included. The labial bone thickness was assessed at different measurement levels (0, 2, 4 and 6 mm apical to the implant shoulder (IS)) postoperatively (T1), 6 months postoperatively (T2) and 5 years postoperatively (T3). The pink aesthetic score (PES) was evaluated before surgery (T0) and at T2 and T3. Implant success, complications and patient satisfaction were evaluated at every visit.
Results
Thirty-six patients (18 in the MSST group) underwent follow-up for 5 years, with no cases of implant failure. Two cases of exposure were detected in the MSST group, but there were no significant effects on hard or soft tissue. Patients in the MSST group showed less and more stable bone resorption than did those in the CIIT group at any measurement level and any time. A higher PES was achieved in the MSST group. Patient satisfaction was similar in both groups.
Conclusions
The MSST is a reliable immediate implantation method because of its ability to preserve the alveolar bone and provide superior recovery of aesthetics.
期刊介绍:
Clinical Oral Implants Research conveys scientific progress in the field of implant dentistry and its related areas to clinicians, teachers and researchers concerned with the application of this information for the benefit of patients in need of oral implants. The journal addresses itself to clinicians, general practitioners, periodontists, oral and maxillofacial surgeons and prosthodontists, as well as to teachers, academicians and scholars involved in the education of professionals and in the scientific promotion of the field of implant dentistry.