The study design is an observational study of a group of 120 patients who were treated 5 years ago with immediate dental implant placement and an implant-supported restoration because of having a failing tooth in the maxillary aesthetic region or, in case of a post-extraction defect, were treated with an alveolar ridge preservation, delayed implant placement and an implant-supported restoration.
Conditions
Interventions
Follow-up evaluation after 5 years.
Sponsors
University Medical Center Groningen
Eligibility
Inclusion criteria
Inclusion criteria: • Patients referred to the department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery 5 years ago and treated with immediate dental implant placement and an implant-supported restoration because of having a failing tooth in the maxillary aesthetic region or, in case of a post-extraction defect, were treated with an alveolar ridge preservation, delayed implant placement and an implant-supported restoration. At the time of treatment: • The patient was 18 years or older; • The failing tooth was an incisor (central or lateral), cuspid or first bicuspid in the maxilla; the adjacent teeth are natural teeth; • Sufficient healthy and vital bone to insert a dental implant with a minimum length of 10 mm and at least 3.5 mm in diameter with initial stability > 45 Ncm • The implant site was free from infection; • Adequate oral hygiene (modified plaque index and modified sulcus bleeding index = 1); • Sufficient mesio-distal, bucco-lingual, and interocclusal space for placement of an anatomic restoration; • The temporary restoration could be designed free from occlusal contact; • The patient was capable of understanding and giving informed consent.
Exclusion criteria
Exclusion criteria: • Medical and general contraindications for the surgical procedures; • Presence of an active and uncontrolled periodontal disease; • Bruxism; • Smoking • A history of local radiotherapy to the head and neck region.
Design outcomes
Primary
| Measure | Time frame |
|---|---|
| Change in peri-implant marginal bone level. | — |
Secondary
| Measure | Time frame |
|---|---|
| • Implant survival and restoration survival • Change in mid-buccal mucosal level • Changes in inter-proximal mucosal • Peri-implant mucosa and implant crown aesthetics assessed from photographs using the Pink Esthetic Score-White Esthetic Score (PES/WES). • Probing pocket depth • Amount of plaque • Mucosa condition • Volume of the interproximal papilla, using the papilla index • Patient satisfaction | — |
Contacts
Public ContactHenny J.A. Meijer
University Medical Center Groningen
Outcome results
None listed