Comparison of Immediate Implant Placement Following Extraction with and Without Socket-Shield Technique in Esthetic Region
- 31 Downloads
Immediate implant with socket shield and immediate implant without socket shield are the two techniques which can be used to preserve the already thin labial bone in the esthetic region, thus eliminating the need for graft materials.
To compare the efficacy of immediate implant placement after extraction without socket-shield technique and with socket-shield technique in the esthetic region.
Materials and Methods
Sixteen patients who reported with unsalvageable maxillary anterior teeth with labial bone thickness of less than 2 mm, depicted on preoperative CBCT, were chosen for the study and randomly assigned one of the two groups: Group A comprising socket-shield technique patients and Group B comprising immediate implant placement without socket shield. The labial bone thickness was analyzed along its entire length through CBCT scan at definite follow-up intervals up to a period of 12 months after the procedure.
Follow-up of 1 year demonstrated a statistically significant reduction in the labial bone thickness at the crest in Group B after 8th and 12th months of implant placement.
The two techniques need further comparison though our study results demonstrated better preservation of bone through the socket-shield technique, thus eliminating the need for any bony substitutes.
KeywordsSocket-shield technique Immediate implants Labial bone thickness
Compliance with Ethical Standards
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.
- 1.Hämmerle CH, Araújo MG, Simion M, Consensgroup O (2011) Evidence-based knowledge on the biology and treatment of extraction sockets. Clin Oral Implant Res 2012(23):80–82Google Scholar
- 2.Nevins M, Camelo M, de Paoli S, Friedland B, Schenk RK, Parma-Benfenati S, Simion M, Tinti C, Wagenberg B (2006) A study of the fate of the buccal wall of extraction sockets of teeth with prominent roots. J Periodontol 26:19–29Google Scholar
- 3.Carlsson GE, Persson G (1967) Morphologic changes of the manidible after extraction and wearing of dentures. A longitudinal clinical, and X-ray cephalometric study covering 5 years. Odontol Rev 18:27–54Google Scholar
- 5.Misch CE (1993) Contemporary implant dentistry, 2nd edn. Mosby, St. Louis, MissouriGoogle Scholar
- 6.Evans CD, Chen ST (2008) Esthetic outcomes of immediate implant placements. Clin Oral Implant Res 19:73–80Google Scholar
- 10.Abadzhiev M, Nenkov P, Velcheva P (2014) Conventional immediate implant placement and Immediate placement with Socket shield technique—which is better. Int J Clin Med Res 1(5):176–180Google Scholar
- 18.Baumer D, Zuhr O, Rebele S, H€urzeler M (2017) Socket shield technique for immediate implant placement—clinical, radiographic and volumetric data after 5 years. Clin Oral Implants Res 00:1–9Google Scholar
- 23.Alsaffar ZJ, Shafshak SM, Shokry SM (2016) Assessment of labial and palatal alveolar bone thickness and height in maxillary anterior teeth in Saudi population using cone-beam computed tomography. Int J Contemp Dent 7:1–6Google Scholar