Background : Evaluation of dimensional behavior of peri-implant tissues in implants immediately exposed or submerged in fresh extraction and healed sites: a histological study in dogs [1]
After the tooth loss, there is a progressive involution of the alveolar bone both in the horizontal and the vertical dimensions [1, 2]. Moreover, the most rapid reduction in the alveolar bone after tooth extraction occurs during the first 3 months [3, 4]. Implants immediately positioned in alveolus after the surgical extraction of the tooth exhibit a success ranging from 92.7 to 98.0% [5]. Some authors suggested that immediate implant placement may counteract the bone remodeling process and preserve the dimension of the alveolar ridge [6,7,8]. However, multiple animal investigations have failed to support this hypothesis [3, 9]. In this sense, studies by Araújo et al. [3, 10] found a pronounced resorption of the buccal and lingual bony walls after immediate placement in fresh extraction sockets. In long-term observations, no significant differences in the success and esthetic outcomes have been reported between immediate and delayed implants [11,12,13].
The surgical requirements for ideal immediate implants in fresh alveolus include atraumatic tooth extraction, preservation of the extraction socket walls, and thorough alveolar curettage to eliminate any possible pathological material [14, 15]. Also, primary implant stability is also an essential requirement and is achieved through the use of implants that exceed the alveolar apex by 3–5 mm or by placing a dental implant with a greater diameter than the alveolar socket [16, 17]. Gehrke et al. [18] demonstrate that the stabilities of the implants placed into fresh extraction sockets or at healed alveolar sites exhibited similar ISQ value evolutions across the three investigated time points (0, 90, and 150 days).
Non-submerged implants showed comparable clinical results to submerged implants and resulted in higher patient satisfaction due to decreased surgical intervention [19]. In this regard, Abrahamsson et al. [20] compared the mucosa and the bone tissue surrounding implants non-submerged or submerged and observed that parameters such as the length of the barrier epithelium of the peri-implant mucosa, the height of the zone of connective tissue integration, the level of the marginal bone, and the density of bone between threads were almost identical in the two experimental groups at the end of the healing period.
Serial posts:
- Abstract : Evaluation of dimensional behavior of peri-implant tissues in implants immediately exposed or submerged in fresh extraction and healed sites: a histological study in dogs
- Background : Evaluation of dimensional behavior of peri-implant tissues in implants immediately exposed or submerged in fresh extraction and healed sites: a histological study in dogs [1]
- Background : Evaluation of dimensional behavior of peri-implant tissues in implants immediately exposed or submerged in fresh extraction and healed sites: a histological study in dogs [2]
- Methods : Evaluation of dimensional behavior of peri-implant tissues in implants immediately exposed or submerged in fresh extraction and healed sites: a histological study in dogs [1]
- Methods : Evaluation of dimensional behavior of peri-implant tissues in implants immediately exposed or submerged in fresh extraction and healed sites: a histological study in dogs [2]
- Methods : Evaluation of dimensional behavior of peri-implant tissues in implants immediately exposed or submerged in fresh extraction and healed sites: a histological study in dogs [3]
- Results : Evaluation of dimensional behavior of peri-implant tissues in implants immediately exposed or submerged in fresh extraction and healed sites: a histological study in dogs
- Discussion : Evaluation of dimensional behavior of peri-implant tissues in implants immediately exposed or submerged in fresh extraction and healed sites: a histological study in dogs [1]
- Discussion : Evaluation of dimensional behavior of peri-implant tissues in implants immediately exposed or submerged in fresh extraction and healed sites: a histological study in dogs [2]
- Discussion : Evaluation of dimensional behavior of peri-implant tissues in implants immediately exposed or submerged in fresh extraction and healed sites: a histological study in dogs [3]
- Conclusions : Evaluation of dimensional behavior of peri-implant tissues in implants immediately exposed or submerged in fresh extraction and healed sites: a histological study in dogs
- References : Evaluation of dimensional behavior of peri-implant tissues in implants immediately exposed or submerged in fresh extraction and healed sites: a histological study in dogs [1]
- References : Evaluation of dimensional behavior of peri-implant tissues in implants immediately exposed or submerged in fresh extraction and healed sites: a histological study in dogs [2]
- References : Evaluation of dimensional behavior of peri-implant tissues in implants immediately exposed or submerged in fresh extraction and healed sites: a histological study in dogs [3]
- References : Evaluation of dimensional behavior of peri-implant tissues in implants immediately exposed or submerged in fresh extraction and healed sites: a histological study in dogs [4]
- References : Evaluation of dimensional behavior of peri-implant tissues in implants immediately exposed or submerged in fresh extraction and healed sites: a histological study in dogs [5]
- Author information : Evaluation of dimensional behavior of peri-implant tissues in implants immediately exposed or submerged in fresh extraction and healed sites: a histological study in dogs
- Ethics declarations : Evaluation of dimensional behavior of peri-implant tissues in implants immediately exposed or submerged in fresh extraction and healed sites: a histological study in dogs
- Rights and permissions : Evaluation of dimensional behavior of peri-implant tissues in implants immediately exposed or submerged in fresh extraction and healed sites: a histological study in dogs
- About this article : Evaluation of dimensional behavior of peri-implant tissues in implants immediately exposed or submerged in fresh extraction and healed sites: a histological study in dogs
- Table 1 Mean, median, standard deviation, and standard error for each group evaluated for lingual as well as buccal sites of the crestal bone height (in mm) for all groups : Evaluation of dimensional behavior of peri-implant tissues in implants immediately exposed or submerged in fresh extraction and healed sites: a histological study in dogs
- Table 2 Mean, median, standard deviation, and standard error for each group evaluated for lingual as well as buccal sites of the tissue thickness (in mm) for all groups : Evaluation of dimensional behavior of peri-implant tissues in implants immediately exposed or submerged in fresh extraction and healed sites: a histological study in dogs
- Table 3 Statistical analysis comparing measured distances (A-B and C-D) among different groups in buccal and lingual sites : Evaluation of dimensional behavior of peri-implant tissues in implants immediately exposed or submerged in fresh extraction and healed sites: a histological study in dogs
- Fig. 1. Image of the implant (a) and surface (b) used in the present study : Evaluation of dimensional behavior of peri-implant
- Fig. 2. Parameters measured in each group. Crestal bone loss is the distance between the implant collar (A) and the first bone contact of the crestal bone (B) = A-B bone height; and, the tissue thickness that is the distance from the implant collar (C) to the more external portion of the tissues (D) = C-D tissue thickness. Picrosirius red staining. Original magnification × 16 : Evaluation of dimensional behavior of peri-implant
- Fig. 3. Images of groups 1 and 2 representing the implants place in fresh sockets sites. Picrosirius red staining. Original magnification × 4 : Evaluation of dimensional behavior of peri-implant
- Fig. 4. Images of groups 3 and 4 representing the implants place in healed alveolar sites. Picrosirius red staining. Original magnification × 4 : Evaluation of dimensional behavior of peri-implant
- Fig. 5. Graph comparing the data of buccal (B) and lingual (L) measured the A-B distance (bone height). Group 1 = implant installed in fresh extraction and submerged; group 2 = implants in fresh extraction and immediately exposed; group 3 = implants installed in healed site and submerged; and group 4 = implants in healed site and immediately exposed : Evaluation of dimensional behavior of peri-implant
- Fig. 6. Graph comparing the data of buccal (B) and lingual (L) measured the C-D distance (tissue thickness). Group 1 = implant installed in fresh extraction and submerged; group 2 = implants in fresh extraction and immediately exposed; group 3 = implants installed in healed site and submerged; and group 4 = implants in healed site and immediately exposed : Evaluation of dimensional behavior of peri-implant
- Fig. 7. Multiple graphs comparing A-B distance (height bone) (a) and the C-D distance (tissue thickness) (b) among different groups. Differences between groups were assessed by Dunn’s multiple comparison test (*P < 0.05; **P < 0.01; ***P < 0.001). 1 = (group 1) implant installed in fresh extraction and submerged; 2 = (group 2) implants in fresh extraction and immediately exposed; 3 = (group 3) implants installed in healed site and submerged; and 4 = (group 4) implants in healed site and immediately exposed : Evaluation of dimensional behavior of peri-implant