الفهرس 
Title : Socket shield technique versus conventional immediate implant placement in thin buccofacial bone to evaluate buccal bone resorption: A Randomized Controlled Trial
AbstractOnly 14 pages are availabe for public view
 |  | from | 172 |  |  |
| | | from | 172 | | |
Abstract
Background: The alveolar ridge resorbs and collapses following tooth removal which continues to be a
major concern for practitioners. Many researchers concluded that buccal aspect of the ridge is more
prone to resorption, as it is primarily supplied by the periodontal tissues and ligaments of the tooth.
Therefore, extraction of the hopeless tooth, may be a reason for buccal cortical plate resorbing at a faster
rate than the palatal plate leading to its total degradation. This may lead to dimensional changes in the
human ridge and the aesthetic area is highly affected by this process
Materials and methods: 28 patients with thin buccal bone not more than 1mm in the anterior region
were randomly assigned to 2 groups receiving immediate implantation with socket shield technique or
immediate implantation without socket-shield and followed up to 6 months. Buccal bone resorption,
thickness, implant stability, pain scale and pink esthetic score were measured at baseline, 6 and 12
months.
vi
Results: Radiographic assessment showed that socket shield technique with simultaneous implant
placement group resulted in gain of bucco-facial bone width compared to that of the conventional
immediate placement group height when baseline and postoperative readings were compared after
months and 12 months. SS showed promising results in maintaining thin buccal bone, implant stability
using Osstell measurements compared to conventional immediate implant placement.
Conclusion: Volumetric analysis showed a low degree of contour changes from extraction and implant
placement to the follow-ups. Within the limitations of this Randomized controlled study, the socket
shield technique offers reduced invasiveness at the time of surgery and high esthetic outcomes with
effective preservation of facial tissue contours compared to the conventional immediate implantation.
This technique should not be used in routine clinical practice until a higher-level evidence clinical trials
is available.