Retrospective study of alveolar ridge preservation compared with no alveolar ridge preservation in periodontally compromised extraction sockets

International Journal of Implant Dentistry

Ki-Tae Koo¹  Yang-Jo Seol¹  Yong-Moo Lee¹  Jung-Ju Kim¹  Junseob Yun¹  Jungwon Lee² 

[1]Department of Periodontology, School of Dentistry and Dental Research Institute, Seoul National University, Seoul, Republic of Korea

[2]One-Stop Specialty Center, Seoul National University Dental Hospital, Seoul, Republic of Korea

[3]Department of Periodontology, School of Dentistry and Dental Research Institute, Seoul National University, Seoul, Republic of Korea

关键词: Bone substitutes;    Guided tissue regeneration;    Bone regeneration;    Clinical research;    Clinical trials;   

DOI  :  10.1186/s40729-021-00305-2

来源: Springer

【 摘 要 】

BackgroundTo minimize alveolar bone resorption, alveolar ridge preservation (ARP) has been proposed. Recently, interest in improving the feasibility of implant placement has gradually increased, especially in situations of infection such as periodontal and/or endodontic lesions. The aim of this study was to investigate if ARP improves feasibility of implant placement compared with no ARP in periodontally compromised sites. Secondary endpoints were the necessity of bone graft at the time of implant placement and implant failure before loading at ARP compared with no ARP.Material and methodsThis retrospective study was performed using dental records and radiographs obtained from patients who underwent tooth extraction due to chronic periodontal pathology. Outcomes including the feasibility of implant placement, horizontal bone augmentation, vertical bone augmentation, sinus floor elevation, total bone augmentation at the time of implant placement, and implant failure before loading were investigated. Multivariable logistic regression analysis was performed to examine the influence of multiple variables on the clinical outcomes.ResultsIn total, 418 extraction sites (171 without ARP and 247 with ARP) in 287 patients were included in this study. The ARP group (0.8%) shows significantly lower implant placement infeasibility than the no ARP group (4.7%). Horizontal and vertical bone augmentations were significantly influenced by location and no ARP. Total bone augmentation was significantly influenced by sex, location, and no ARP.ConclusionARP in periodontally compromised sites may improve the feasibility of implant placement. In addition, ARP attenuate the severity of the bone augmentation procedure.

【 授权许可】

CC BY