الفهرس 
Title : Clinical Evaluation of Soft Tissue Esthetics Around Immediate Implant Using Dual Zone Therapeutic Concept versus Buccal Gap Fill to Bone Level A Randomized Controlled Clinical Trial
AbstractOnly 14 pages are availabe for public view
 |  | from | 182 |  |  |
| | | from | 182 | | |
Abstract
Aim: The study was aimed at determining the evaluation of the soft tissue esthetics around immediate implant using dual zone therapeutic concept compared to filling the buccal gap with bone graft till the buccal bone level. Methodology: The present study was conducted on 24 subjects. Dental patients were recruited in a m from the outpatient Diagnostic center, Faculty of Dentistry, Cairo University. Participants who fulfilled the inclusion criteria and provided informed consent were randomly assigned to either test or control group by means of simple randomization with a 1:1 allocation ratio. Consequently, the patients were allocated to receive either immediate implant with dual zone therapeutic concept and immediate temporization (test group) or immediate implant with bone graft till buccal bone with immediate implant (control group). Pink esthetic score (PES), Buccal bone loss (BBL), Soft tissue thickness (STTT), keratinized tissue width (KTW), post-operative swelling (POS) and Patient Satisfaction (PS) were measured with 1 year follow up. All these parameters were subjected to statistical analysis. Results: The PES result in the test group was increased to 11.36±1.69mm while for the control groups, the values increased to 10.80±1.55mm after 12 months with no statistical significance between the 2 groups. Both treatment protocols could not prevent the BBL after 12 months. STT assessment showed a statistically significance increase in both groups after 12 months but this gain was not statistically significant between the 2 groups. The mean KTW after 12 months in the test and control groups was 4.55 ± 1.08mm and 4.20 ± 0.82mm respectively with no statistical significance between the two groups. The POS was reported by the patients for 5 days post-surgery in the test group however, the control group reported only 3 days of POS. There was no statistical significance in patient satisfaction between the 2 groups except in only 1 question regarding the post-operative complications