4.0 Article

Long-Term Stability of Soft Tissues Following Alveolar Ridge Preservation: 10-Year Results of a Prospective Study Around Nonsubmerged Implants

Journal

Publisher

QUINTESSENCE PUBLISHING CO INC
DOI: 10.11607/prd.2133

Keywords

-

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the long-term clinical outcomes around implants placed in sites previously augmented with demineralized bovine bone mineral with 10% collagen (Bio-Oss Collagen, Geistlich). In this prospective study, 36 consecutive, healthy patients, in need of a single-tooth extraction (incisors, canines, and premolars) and implant replacement, were included. After tooth extraction, Bio-Oss Collagen was inserted in the socket and covered either with a double layer of collagen membrane (test) or with a few drops of a flowable polylactide polymer (control). Following a healing period of 4 to 6 months, a single nonsubmerged implant surgery was performed. After cementation of a single ceramic crown, patients were asked to follow an individualized supportive periodontal therapy program. Clinical and radiographic data were obtained after prosthesis delivery (baseline) and at the 10-year follow-up visit. At the 10-year examination, two patients were lost to follow-up. All implants demonstrated healthy pen-implant soft tissues as documented by standard parameters (full-mouth plaque score, full-mouth bleeding score, local bleeding on probing) in both groups. Mean soft tissue recession (REC) was 0.39 +/- 0.54 mm for the test group and 0.50 +/- 0.33 mm for the control, with no significant difference between the two groups. The results of this prospective study confirmed the long-term stability of the pen-implant marginal soft tissues supported by regenerated bone by means of the described technique using Bio-Oss Collagen. If the patient is properly followed throughout time, the risk for mucosal recession is low, with < 1 mm of mean REC after 10 years.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.0
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available