Immediate implantation in fresh extraction sockets. A controlled clinical and histological study in man.

Autor:	Paolantonio, Michele, Dolci, Marco, Scarano, Antonio, d'Archivio, Domenico, di Placido, Giacinto, Tumini, Vincenzo, Piattelli, Adriano, Paolantonio, M, Dolci, M, Scarano, A, d'Archivio, D, di Placido, G, Tumini, V, Piattelli, A
Předmět:	DENTAL implants DENTAL extraction BONE resorption DISEASES ALVEOLAR process OSSEOINTEGRATION COMPARATIVE studies ALVEOLAR process surgery ANTIPSYCHOTIC agents BONE growth CLINICAL trials CONNECTIVE tissue cells DYES & dyeing SURGICAL flaps DIGITAL image processing LONGITUDINAL method RESEARCH methodology MEDICAL cooperation NONPARAMETRIC statistics PERIODONTICS PERIODONTIUM PHENOTHIAZINE PROSTHETICS RADIOGRAPHY RESEARCH STATISTICS TITANIUM EVALUATION research TREATMENT effectiveness BENZENE derivatives OSTEOBLASTS
Zdroj:	Journal of Periodontology; Nov2001, Vol. 72 Issue 11, p1560-1571, 12p, 13 Color Photographs, 2 Charts
Abstrakt:	Background: Early implantation may preserve the alveolar anatomy, and the placement of a fixture in a fresh extraction socket helps to maintain the bony crest. Although a number of clinical studies exist, no histological reports show the outcome of implantation in fresh extraction sockets without the use of membranes in humans compared to implants placed in mature bone. Methods: Forty-eight healthy patients, receiving at least 4 fixtures in each of 2 symmetrical quadrants, underwent placement of 1 experimental fixture placed in a fresh extraction socket (TI) and 1 contralateral fixture in mature bone (CI). TI were placed after atraumatical tooth extraction, with a surgical site at the apex of the socket and a tight contact between the fixture and the socket's walls, but without the use of filling materials or membranes. The flap was coronally repositioned to obtain primary wound closure. Immediately after surgical intervention, a standardized periapical radiograph was taken. Second-stage surgery was done after 6 months. Six months after the second surgery, a second standardized periapical radiograph was taken and clinical parameters (bleeding and plaque index) recorded. Marginal bone loss (MBL) from the time of implant placement to the time of fixture removal was calculated by comparing periapical radiographs. TI and CI were then removed by a hollow drill to obtain histological specimens. Non-demineralized sections were stained by acid fuchsin and toluidine blue, and by von Kossa to evaluate the degree of bone mineralization. The percentage of direct implant-bone contact (DBC) was calculated by a computerized microscopic digitizer. Results: No significant differences in the clinical and radiographic parameters were observed between the 2 experimental categories. There was no statistically significant difference between TI and CI for DBC either in the maxilla or in the mandible. No connective or fibrous tissues were present around TI or CI. Bone resorption was not present in any of the histological sections. Conclusions: The present study shows that when a screw-type dental implant is placed without the use of barrier membranes or other regenerative materials into a fresh extraction socket with a bone-to-implant gap of 2 mm or less, the clinical outcome and degree of osteointegration does not differ from implants placed in healed, mature bone. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]
Databáze:	Complementary Index
Externí odkaz:	Zobrazit plný text záznamu Plný text