Socket-Shield Technique for Buccofacial Tissues Preservation with Immediate Implant Placement and PRF Application (Clinical and Radiographic Evaluation) | ||||
| Al-Azhar Assiut Dental Journal | ||||
| Volume 7, Issue 1, April 2024, Page 1-8 PDF (1.38 MB) | ||||
| Document Type: Original Article | ||||
| DOI: 10.21608/aadj.2024.355428 | ||||
 View on SCiNiTO | ||||
| Authors | ||||
Mostafa Mahmoud Samy 1; Ibrahim Hammad* 2; khalid S Hassan3; Mohammed Nahed Attia4
| ||||
| 1General Authority for Health Insurance, Assiut | ||||
| 2Oral Medicine, Periodontology Oral Diagnosis and Dental Radiology Faculty of Dental Medicine Al – Azhar University (Assiut branch | ||||
| 3Professor of Oral Medicine, Periodontology Oral Diagnosis and Dental Radiology, Dean, Faculty of Dental Medicine, Al – Azhar University (Assiut branch). | ||||
| 4Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Faculty of Dentistry, Assiut Universit | ||||
| Abstract | ||||
| Aim: The aim of this study was to assess clinically and radiographically the efficacy of the socket shield technique in maintaining facial contours and crestal bone after immediate implant placement, combined with PRF application. Subject and Methods: Sixteens patients with 16 implants were divided into two groups, Group “1”: 8 Patients were subjected to socket shield procedure combined with immediate implant placement alone. Group “2”: 8 Patients were subject to socket Shield technique and immediate implant placement combined with PRF application. Clinical parameters were gathered at baseline, 6-, and 12-months post-operative. Results: There was a statistically significant difference between (Group 1) and (Group 2) in (mSGI), There was a statistically significant difference between (Group 1) and (Group 2) at 6 months in implant stability, and there was a statistically significant difference between both groups at 6 months in peri-implant pocket depth, there was no statistically significant difference between (Group 1) and (Group 2) in modified plaque index. Also, there was no statistically significant difference between (Group 1) and (Group 2) at different periods in bone density, In addition, There was a statistically significant difference between (Group 1) and (Group 2) groups at 12 months in (MBL). While there was no statistically significant difference between (Baseline), (6m), and (12m) between the two groups in labial bone thickness. Conclusion: The socket shield technique with or without PRF application was shown to be effective to achieve osseointegration without any inflammatory response. Using PRF with socket shield and immediate dental implants exhibited to be superior to immediate dental implants with socket shield alone in improving peri-implant conditions and dental implants. | ||||
| Keywords | ||||
| Socket-Shield Technique; Buccofacial Tissues Preservation; Immediate Implant; PRF; Osseointegration | ||||
|
Statistics Article View: 19 PDF Download: 14 |
||||
