CONVENTIONAL VERSUS GUIDED SOCKET-SHIELD TECHNIQUE FOR IMMEDIATE IMPLANT (RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED CLINICAL TRIAL). | ||||
| Alexandria Dental Journal | ||||
| Article 18, Volume 49, Issue 1, April 2024, Page 82-88 PDF (416.82 K) | ||||
| Document Type: Original Article | ||||
| DOI: 10.21608/adjalexu.2023.188274.1342 | ||||
 View on SCiNiTO | ||||
| Authors | ||||
Ahmed A. M. Albhaisi  1; Ossama Abbas Sweedan2; Haitham Mohammed Abou Eleneen3
| ||||
| 1Oral and Maxillofacial Department, Faculty of Dentistry, Faculty of Dentistry, Alexandria University, Alexandria, Egypt | ||||
| 2Oral and Maxillofacial surgery department, Faculty of Dentistry, Alexandria University, Egypt | ||||
| 3Abraj Elgeesh St. | ||||
| Abstract | ||||
| ABSTRACT Introduction: Restorative implant treatment is hampered by changes in the alveolar ridge's dimensions after tooth extraction. Due to the disintegration of the periodontal ligament complex surrounding the bundle of bones, Numerous clinical research have demonstrated that the buccal rather than the lingual portion of the ridge contour is more compromised. To avoid the detrimental effects of tooth extraction, several procedures have been developed to preserve the natural ridge dimension. However, these techniques could only partly compensate but not prevent the resorption process. In an attempt to overcome this challenge, the socket-shield technique (SST), based on the root submergence technique (RST) was purposed by Hürzeler et al, 2010, in which a partial buccal root fragment was retained simultaneously to immediate implant placement. Aim of the study: Comparison between guided and conventional free hand socket shield techniques. Materials and Method: This was a randomized controlled clinical trial (RCT) in which patients were randomly assigned to two groups: the study group received twelve dental implants in the maxillary esthetic region using guided SST, while the control group received twelve implants using conventional SST. All patients received pre- and post- operative Cone Beam Computed Tomography (CBCT) to assess the accuracy of socket shield preparation in comparison to the actual fragment Results: The guided SST showed better results regarding duration and accuracy, results were statistically significant (p ≤ 0.05). Conclusion: The guided socket-shield technique had shown better accuracy and less procedure time when compared with the conventional freehand socket-shield technique. | ||||
| Keywords | ||||
| Alveolar bone preservation; Guided Socket Shield; Esthetic zone; Buccal tooth fragment; Partial extraction technique | ||||
|
Statistics Article View: 61 PDF Download: 121 |
||||
