Treffer: Immediate Implant Placement and Provisionalization in the Aesthetic Zone Using a Digital Workflow:A 1-Year Prospective Case Series Study

Title:
Immediate Implant Placement and Provisionalization in the Aesthetic Zone Using a Digital Workflow:A 1-Year Prospective Case Series Study
Source:
Donker, V J J, Raghoebar, G M, Vissink, A & Meijer, H J A 2025, 'Immediate Implant Placement and Provisionalization in the Aesthetic Zone Using a Digital Workflow : A 1-Year Prospective Case Series Study', Clinical Implant Dentistry and Related Research, vol. 27, no. 4, e70079. https://doi.org/10.1111/cid.70079
Publication Year:
2025
Collection:
University of Groningen research database
Document Type:
Fachzeitschrift article in journal/newspaper
File Description:
application/pdf
Language:
English
Relation:
info:eu-repo/semantics/altIdentifier/pmid/40707170; info:eu-repo/semantics/altIdentifier/hdl/https://hdl.handle.net/11370/4a73bb6f-fffe-43e8-8329-da9214eccfa8; info:eu-repo/semantics/altIdentifier/pissn/1523-0899
DOI:
10.1111/cid.70079
Rights:
info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess ; http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/
Accession Number:
edsbas.978AFBAC
Database:
BASE

Weitere Informationen

INTRODUCTION: Immediate implant placement and provisionalization in the maxillary aesthetic zone necessitates meticulous treatment planning. The integration of intraoral scanning with cone beam computed tomography allows for three-dimensional prosthetic-driven planning of the implant. Additionally, it facilitates static computer-assisted implant surgery and prefabrication of a temporary restoration, enabling chairside restoration of the immediate implant. This study aimed to evaluate the clinical, aesthetic, radiographic, and patient-reported outcomes after immediate implant placement and restoration. MATERIALS AND METHODS: In a prospective case series, 30 patients with a failing tooth in the maxillary aesthetic zone were included and received immediate implant placement with a bone graft and a prefabricated temporary restoration. The definitive restoration was placed 3 months later. The clinical, aesthetic, radiographic, and patient-reported outcomes were collected prior to implant treatment, 6 weeks after the temporary restoration, and 1 month and 1 year after the definitive restoration. RESULTS: The prefabricated temporary restoration could be placed in all patients. Three cases of early implant failure were observed (implant survival rate 90%); hence, 27 patients were evaluated after 1 year. The survival and success rates were 100% for the temporary and 100% and 96%, respectively, for the definitive restorations. Plaque, bleeding on probing, and peri-implant inflammation were absent in most cases. At the 1-year follow-up, the mean (SD) Pink Esthetic Score and White Esthetic Score (scale 0-20) was 15.4 (2.5). The mean (SD) marginal bone level change between implant placement and the 1-year follow-up was -0.18 mm (0.57) on the mesial side and -0.44 mm (1.23) on the distal side. The median buccal bone thickness remained stable after immediate implant placement and grafting. The mean (SD) patient satisfaction (scale 0-10) was 9.2 (0.8) at the 1-year evaluation. CONCLUSION: The digital workflow has the potential ...