The socket shield technique and its complications, implant survival rate, and clinical outcomes: a systematic review
0
조회
0
다운로드
1
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
Purpose: The aim of this systematic review was to evaluate the effectiveness of the socket shield technique (SST), an innovative surgical method introduced in 2010, for reducing buccal bone plate resorption. Methods: The review was conducted following the PRISMA guidelines. Clinical studies conducted in humans and investigating the SST were searched on PubMed (MEDLINE), Embase, Web of Knowledge, and Google Scholar in November and December 2021. The implant survival rate, percentage of complications, and clinical parameters (marginal bone loss [MBL], pink esthetic score [PES], and buccal bone plate resorption [BBPR]) were analyzed using the collected data. Results: The initial search resulted in 132 articles. After article screening, the full texts of 19 studies were read and 17 articles were finally included in the review. In total, 656 implants were installed with the SST. Nine of the 656 implants experienced failure, resulting in an implant survival rate of 98.6%. The percentage of complications was about 3.81%. The analysis of clinical parameters (MBL, PES, and BBPR), showed favorable results for the SST. The mean MBL in implants placed with the SST was 0.39±0.28 mm versus 1.00±0.55 mm in those placed without the SST. PES had a better outcome in the SST group, with an average of 12.08±1.18 versus 10.77±0.74. BBPR had more favorable results in implants placed with the SST (0.32±0.10 mm) than in implants placed with the standard technique (1.05±0.18 mm). Conclusions: The SST could be considered beneficial for preserving the buccal bone plate. However, since only 7 of the included studies were long-term randomized controlled trials comparing the SST with the standard implant placement technique, the conclusions drawn from this systematic review should be interpreted with caution. Trial Registration: PROSPERO Identifier: CRD42020180637
Abstract
Purpose: The aim of this systematic review was to evaluate the effectiveness of the socket shield technique (SST), an innovative surgical method introduced in 2010, for reducing buccal bone plate resorption. Methods: The review was conducted following the PRISMA guidelines. Clinical studies conducted in humans and investigating the SST were searched on PubMed (MEDLINE), Embase, Web of Knowledge, and Google Scholar in November and December 2021. The implant survival rate, percentage of complications, and clinical parameters (marginal bone loss [MBL], pink esthetic score [PES], and buccal bone plate resorption [BBPR]) were analyzed using the collected data. Results: The initial search resulted in 132 articles. After article screening, the full texts of 19 studies were read and 17 articles were finally included in the review. In total, 656 implants were installed with the SST. Nine of the 656 implants experienced failure, resulting in an implant survival rate of 98.6%. The percentage of complications was about 3.81%. The analysis of clinical parameters (MBL, PES, and BBPR), showed favorable results for the SST. The mean MBL in implants placed with the SST was 0.39±0.28 mm versus 1.00±0.55 mm in those placed without the SST. PES had a better outcome in the SST group, with an average of 12.08±1.18 versus 10.77±0.74. BBPR had more favorable results in implants placed with the SST (0.32±0.10 mm) than in implants placed with the standard technique (1.05±0.18 mm). Conclusions: The SST could be considered beneficial for preserving the buccal bone plate. However, since only 7 of the included studies were long-term randomized controlled trials comparing the SST with the standard implant placement technique, the conclusions drawn from this systematic review should be interpreted with caution. Trial Registration: PROSPERO Identifier: CRD42020180637
참고문헌 (34)
- Amler MH, "Histological and histochemical investigation of human alveolar socket healing in undisturbed extraction wounds", J Am Dent Assoc, 61, pp.32~44 (1960)
- Schropp L, "Bone healing and soft tissue contour changes following single-tooth extraction : a clinical and radiographic 12-month prospective study", Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent, 23, pp.313~323 (2003)
- Araújo MG, "Dimensional ridge alterations following tooth extraction. An experimental study in the dog", J Clin Periodontol, 32, pp.212~218 (2005)
- Botticelli D, "Hard-tissue alterations following immediate implant placement in extraction sites", J Clin Periodontol, 31, pp.820~828 (2004)
- Araújo M, "The influence of Bio-Oss Collagen on healing of an extraction socket : an experimental study in the dog", Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent, 28, pp.123~135 (2008)
- Araújo MG, "Socket grafting with the use of autologous bone : an experimental study in the dog", Clin Oral Implants Res, 22, pp.9~13 (2011)
- Lekovic V, "Preservation of alveolar bone in extraction sockets using bioabsorbable membranes", J Periodontol, 69, pp.1044~1049 (1998)
- Hürzeler MB, "The socket-shield technique : a proof-of-principle report", J Clin Periodontol, 37, pp.855~862 (2010)
- Bäumer D, "Socket shield technique for immediate implant placement -clinical, radiographic and volumetric data after 5 years", Clin Oral Implants Res, 28, pp.1450~1458 (2017)
- Gluckman H, "A retrospective evaluation of 128 socket-shield cases in the esthetic zone and posterior sites : partial extraction therapy with up to 4 years follow-up", Clin Implant Dent Relat Res, 20, pp.122~129 (2018)
- Siormpas KD, "The root membrane technique : a retrospective clinical study with up to 10 years of follow-up", Implant Dent, 27, pp.564~574 (2018)
- Mitsias ME, "The root membrane technique : human histologic evidence after 5 years of function", BioMed Res Int, 2017, pp.7269467~ (2017)
- Kumar PR, "Shield the socket: procedure, case report and classification", J Indian Soc Periodontol, 22, pp.266~272 (2018)
- Gharpure AS, "Current evidence on the socket-shield technique : a systematic review", J Oral Implantol, 43, pp.395~403 (2017)
- Mourya A, "Socket-shield technique for implant placement to stabilize the facial gingival and osseous architecture : a systematic review", J Investig Clin Dent, 10, pp.e12449~ (2019)
- Hinze M, "Volumetric alterations around single-tooth implants using the socket-shield technique : preliminary results of a prospective case series", Int J Esthet Dent, 13, pp.146~170 (2018)
- Shamseer L, "Preferred reporting items for systematic review and meta-analysis protocols (PRISMA-P) 2015: elaboration and explanation", BMJ, 350, pp.g7647~ (2015)
- Siormpas KD, "Immediate implant placement in the esthetic zone utilizing the"root-membrane"technique : clinical results up to 5 years postloading", Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants, 29, pp.1397~1405 (2014)
- Abadzhiev M, "Conventional immediate implant placement and immediate placement with socket-shield technique which is better", Int J Clin Med Res, 1, pp.176~180 (2014)
- Mitsias MM, "Longitudinal soft tissue changes during periodontal ligament-mediated immediate implant placement with the rootmembrane technique", Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants, 35, pp.379~385 (2020)
- Hana SA, "Socket shield technique for dental implants in the esthetic zone, clinical and radiographical evaluation", J Duhok Univ, 23, pp.69~80 (2020)
- Bramanti E, "Postextraction dental implant in the aesthetic zone, socket shield technique versus conventional protocol", J Craniofac Surg, 29, pp.1037~1041 (2018)
- Sun C, "Comparing conventional flap-less immediate implantation and socket-shield technique for esthetic and clinical outcomes : a randomized clinical study", Clin Oral Implants Res, 31, pp.181~191 (2020)
- Tiwari S, "Comparison of immediate implant placement following extraction with and without socket-shield technique in esthetic region", J Maxillofac Oral Surg, 19, pp.552~560 (2020)
- Barakat D, "Valuation of the socket shield technique for immediate implantation", Alexandria Dent J, 42, pp.155~161 (2017)
- Atef M, "Comparison of the soft and hard peri-implant tissue dimensional changes around single immediate implants in the esthetic zone with socket shield technique versus using xenograft : a randomized controlled clinical trial", Clin Implant Dent Relat Res, 23, pp.456~465 (2021)
- Abd-Elrahman A, "Socket shield technique vs conventional immediate implant placement with immediate temporization. Randomized clinical trial", Clin Implant Dent Relat Res, 22, pp.602~611 (2020)
- Santhanakrishnan M, "Radiographic and esthetic evaluation following immediate implant placement with or without socket shield and delayed implant placement following socket preservation in the maxillary esthetic region-a randomized controlled clinical trial", Clin Cosmet Investig Dent, 13, pp.479~494 (2021)
- Troiano M, "Bundle bone preservation with Root-T-Belt : case study", Ann Oral Maxillofac Surg, 2, pp.7~ (2014)
- Han CH, "The modified socket shield technique", J Craniofac Surg, 29, pp.2247~2254 (2018)
- Fattouh H, "Socket-shield technique versus guided bone regeneration technique for ridge preservation with immediate implant placement in the esthetic zone", Egypt Dent J, 64, pp.2047~2055 (2018)
- Esposito M, "A 5-year follow-up comparative analysis of the efficacy of various osseointegrated dental implant systems : a systematic review of randomized controlled clinical trials", Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants, 20, pp.557~568 (2005)
- Adell R, "A 15-year study of osseointegrated implants in the treatment of the edentulous jaw", Int J Oral Surg, 10, pp.387~416 (1981)
- Jung YC, "A 1-year radiographic evaluation of marginal bone around dental implants", Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants, 11, pp.811~818 (1996)
