Loading…

Pre-surgical socket analysis for immediate implant placement

Traditional protocols for implant surgery suggest a healing period of 2-3 months from dental extraction to implant placement. Based on all the volumetric modifications produced by that approach, there are authors who advocate for immediate implantology. The aim of the present study was to determine...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Medicina oral, patología oral y cirugía bucal patología oral y cirugía bucal, 2024-05, Vol.29 (3), p.e305-e317
Main Authors: Parra-Moreno, F-J, Schiavo-Di Flaviano, V, Egido-Moreno, S, Saka-Herranz, C, Estrugo-Devesa, A, López-López, J
Format: Article
Language:English
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:Traditional protocols for implant surgery suggest a healing period of 2-3 months from dental extraction to implant placement. Based on all the volumetric modifications produced by that approach, there are authors who advocate for immediate implantology. The aim of the present study was to determine the prevalence of different sockets, and the dimensions of the bone around the upper anterior incisors and canines, to determine the predictability of immediate implants in our population. This is an observational, cross-sectional study based on cone-beam computed tomography images of the anterior maxila of patients attending the Odontological Hospital of the University of Barcelona (OHUB) and requesting for implant treatment. Different measurements were performed on every analyzed tooth, and also they were categorized by using the main dental sockets classifications. Bone attachment levels and cortical thickness are lower in women compared to men in all three types of teeth (the difference in the bone attachment levels ranges from 4.68%-8.63% and in the bone thickness goes from 0.02-0.58mm). Bone attachment level gradually reduces with age. The reductions observed in all the measurements are higher in the case of canines, compared with the other teeth. The differences from patients
ISSN:1698-6946
1698-4447
1698-6946
DOI:10.4317/medoral.26269