Feasibility of Immediate, Early and Delayed Implant Placement for Single Tooth Replacement in the Premaxilla: A Retrospective Cone-Beam Computed Tomography Study of 100 Cases
To assess the feasibility of immediate (IIP), early (EIP) and delayed implant placement (DIP) for single tooth replacement in the premaxilla on the basis of the complete indication area of each approach in routine practice. Data from 100 patients (59 women, 41 men, all Caucasians) aged between 19 an...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Clinical oral implants research 2024-09 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
Zusammenfassung: | To assess the feasibility of immediate (IIP), early (EIP) and delayed implant placement (DIP) for single tooth replacement in the premaxilla on the basis of the complete indication area of each approach in routine practice.
Data from 100 patients (59 women, 41 men, all Caucasians) aged between 19 and 81 years old (mean age 51.71) who had been consecutively treated with a single implant in the premaxilla (13-23) in one private periodontal practice were retrospectively collected. Demographic data, diagnostic information and linear measurements were extracted from patient files and CBCTs. The feasibility of IIP, EIP and DIP was assessed for all cases by both authors, based on the following criteria: availability of apical bone, position of the tooth in relation to the morphology of the alveolar process, buccal bone morphology and presence of midfacial recession. The reasons for not being able to perform an approach, and the viable alternatives for each approach were secondary outcomes. DIP was considered to have been preceded by alveolar ridge preservation (ARP).
Ninety-two patients could be treated by means of IIP, EIP or DIP. In eight patients none of these approaches were possible as they required bone augmentation prior to implant placement. Fifty-two patients (95% CI: 42%-62%) could by treated with IIP, 58 (95% CI: 48%-67%) with EIP and 88 (95% CI: 80%-93%) with DIP. The feasibility proportions of IIP and EIP were significantly lower than the one of DIP (p |
---|---|
ISSN: | 0905-7161 1600-0501 1600-0501 |
DOI: | 10.1111/clr.14359 |