Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Soft Tissue Augmentation After Tooth Extraction Improves Implant Health: Findings From a Clinical Trial.
Ibrahim, Ammar; Saymeh, Rowaida; Yosef, Basima.
Afiliación
  • Ibrahim A; Department of Periodontology, Faculty of Dental Medicine, Damascus University, Damascus, SYR.
  • Saymeh R; Department of Periodontology, Faculty of Dental Medicine, Damascus University, Damascus, SYR.
  • Yosef B; Department of Histopathology, Faculty of Dentistry, Tishreen University, Latakia, SYR.
Cureus ; 16(8): e66263, 2024 Aug.
Article en En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-39238758
ABSTRACT
Background Soft tissue augmentation is a critical procedure in dental implantology aimed at improving peri-implant health and aesthetics. Various materials are used for this purpose, but their comparative effectiveness remains under-researched. This study aimed to evaluate the effects of soft tissue augmentation utilizing two different materials after tooth extraction on peri-implant clinical and radiographic outcomes. Methodology A randomized controlled trial was conducted with 30 participants requiring extraction of non-restorable mandibular posterior teeth. Participants were randomly assigned to receive connective tissue graft (CTG), Fibro-gide (FG), or spontaneous healing (SH) in a 111 allocation ratio. Two months post-treatment, dental implants were placed. Six months after the functional loading of the dental implant, peri-implant health was assessed using the Plaque Accumulation Index, bleeding on probing (BOP), pocket depth, mucosal recession, and marginal bone level. Results At the six-month follow-up, the SH group exhibited significantly higher Plaque Index and BOP percentages (6.43 ± 1.23 and 70%, respectively) compared to the CTG group (0.40 ± 0.32 and 8.3%, respectively) and FG group (0.45 ± 0.44 and 9.7%, respectively). The mean probing pocket depth was also significantly higher in the control group (5.13 ± 0.64 mm), while the CTG and FG groups showed minimal changes (3.83 ± 0.39 mm for both groups). Additionally, gingival recession was higher in the control group (0.65 ± 0.18 mm) compared to the CTG and FG groups (0.03 ± 0.08 mm for both groups). Radiographic analysis revealed greater marginal bone loss in the control group (0.40 ± 0.05 mm) compared to the CTG and FG groups, which demonstrated minimal bone loss (0.17 ± 0.08 mm and 0.20 ± 0.00 mm, respectively). Conclusions The study findings indicate that FG is as effective as CTG in maintaining peri-implant health, outperforming SH. These findings suggest that FG can be a viable alternative to CTG in soft tissue augmentation after tooth extraction, offering a new option for clinicians in the management of extraction sites before dental implant placement.
Palabras clave

Texto completo: 1 Colección: 01-internacional Base de datos: MEDLINE Idioma: En Revista: Cureus Año: 2024 Tipo del documento: Article Pais de publicación: Estados Unidos

Texto completo: 1 Colección: 01-internacional Base de datos: MEDLINE Idioma: En Revista: Cureus Año: 2024 Tipo del documento: Article Pais de publicación: Estados Unidos