International Journal of Implant Dentistry (Dec 2022)

Hard and soft tissue evaluation of alveolar ridge preservation compared to spontaneous healing: a retrospective clinical and volumetric analysis

  • Paolo De Angelis,
  • Giuseppe De Rosa,
  • Paolo Francesco Manicone,
  • Alessandro De Giorgi,
  • Camilla Cavalcanti,
  • Alessandro Speranza,
  • Roberta Grassi,
  • Antonio D’Addona

DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/s40729-022-00456-w
Journal volume & issue
Vol. 8, no. 1
pp. 1 – 11

Abstract

Read online

Abstract Purpose The remodeling process following tooth extraction can be observed as horizontal and vertical bone reduction of the alveolar ridge. Preservation procedures such as alveolar ridge preservation (ARP) aim to maintain the 3D volume of the extraction site. This retrospective study analyzed differences in the hard and soft tissue changes in patients treated with either spontaneous healing or ARP. Methods After tooth extraction, the patients were treated either by spontaneous socket healing (SH group) or with ARP using a xenograft and a resorbable membrane (ARP group). One week before and 6 months after extraction, the patients underwent cone beam computed tomography. A volumetric analysis was performed by superimposing the digital models of the two time points. Intraoral radiography was performed after implant placement, upon prosthesis delivery, and at 1-year post-treatment. An esthetic assessment was conducted using the Pink Esthetic Score (PES). The patients’ overall satisfaction with the implant restoration was investigated at 12 months. Results Intragroup comparisons revealed significant differences between baseline and the 6-month follow-up in both groups at the measured locations (1 mm, 3 mm, and 5 mm below the most coronal aspect of the alveolar ridge) showing a reduction of the horizontal width (P < 0.05). Additionally, after treatment, the horizontal width at 1 mm was significantly different in the SH and ARP groups (P < 0.001), with mean changes of 2.03 ± 0.54 mm and 0.86 ± 0.49 mm, respectively. ARP was associated with an increased PES (11.6 ± 2.2) and a reduction in patients requiring additional grafting procedures in subsequent treatment phases (9% vs 26%; P = 0.11). Conclusions In both groups, significant horizontal and vertical bone loss was observed after the extraction. ARP can reduce linear and volumetric shrinkage of the alveolar ridge, leading to improved outcomes. It can also simplify implant restoration. Graphical Abstract

Keywords