Abstract:Purpose: To evaluate the clinical aesthetic effect of buccal alveolar ridge preservation (ARP) and connective tissue transplantation (CTG) in patients who received a single implant. Methods: Forty-three patients with tooth loss admitted to the Department of Stomatology of Shunde Hospital of Southern Medical University from May 2014 to May 2016 were included in the study. Tooth extraction, ARP, implant implantation, CTG and permanent repair were performed respectively. The incidence of bleeding, depth of probing, marginal bone resorption, and red-white aesthetic effect of implants were evaluated 1 year and 3 years after surgery. The buccal mucosa thickness of implants before, immediately after CTG, 1 year and 3 years after surgery were measured. The patient satisfaction was evaluated by visual analogue scale (VAS) from masticatory function, overall aesthetics, attachment height, and color, respectively. The implant conditions at the third year after surgery were observed, and complications during follow-up were recorded. SPSS 20.0 software package was used for statistical analysis of the data. Results: The follow-up rate in the first year after surgery was 100%, and that in the third year after surgery was 90.70%. One year and 3 years after operation, the aesthetic effect of the implant was satisfactory. At the 3rd year after operation, the scores of the near middle gingival papillary were significantly higher than that at the 1st year after operation (P<0.05). The buccal mucosal thickness of the implant immediately after CTG and 1 year and 3 years after surgery increased significantly compared with that before CTG (P<0.05). The buccal mucosal thickness of the implant increased 1.02 mm (relative stability: 90.12%) 1 year after operation and 1.01 mm (relative stability: 84.31%) 3 years after operation, respectively. The satisfaction scores of the patients on chewing function, overall aesthetics, attachment height and color of the implant immediately after CTG, one year after surgery and 3 years after surgery were all > 8. The 3-year survival rate of the implants was 100%, and the 3-year success rate of the implants was 97.44%. During the follow-up, two patients developed peri-implant mucositis, which was relieved after tooth cleaning, but no complications such as tissue flap necrosis, limited opening and tongue movement disorder occurred. Conclusions: ARP and CTG have good clinical and aesthetic effects on patients with tooth loss. In three years, the buccal mucosal thickness of the implant can be increased and relatively stable, which is worthy of clinical promotion and application.

[Analysis of clinical aesthetic effect of buccal alveolar ridge preservation and connective tissue transplantation with single implant]

[A Prospective Cohort Study on the Effect of Implant Restoration Following Micro Crestal Flap-Alveolar Ridge Preservation at Molar Extraction Sockets with Severe Periodontitis].

[Clinical Effect Evaluation of Immediate Implant and Immediate Restoration with Socket-Shield Technique in Aesthetic Area: a Retrospective Study with Up to 5-Year Follow-Up].

Esthetic outcome and alterations of soft tissue around single implant crowns: a 2-year prospective study.

Immediate Implant Placement with Buccal Bone Augmentation in the Anterior Maxilla with Thin Buccal Plate: A One-Year Follow-Up Case Series.

Three‐dimensional quantitative measurement of buccal augmented tissue with modified coronally advanced tunnel technique and de‐epithelialized gingival graft: a prospective case series

Evaluation of Implant Placement Following Ridge Preservation in Periodontally Compromised Molar Extraction Sockets: Three-year Results of a Prospective Cohort Study.

Three-Dimensional Quantitative Measurement of Buccal Augmented Tissue After MCAT Technique With SCTG: Preliminary Results of a Prospective Case Series

Influence of preservation of the alveolar ridge on delayed implants after extraction of teeth with different defects in the buccal bone

Clinical efficacy of implant treatment following alveolar ridge preservation or natural healing in the extraction sockets of molars with severe periodontitis

Comparing Single Tooth Implant Placement With and Without Allogenic Soft Tissue Augmentation. A Randomized Clinical Trial

[Evaluation of Alveolar Ridge Reconstruction and Esthetic Result Following Immediate Implant].

[Short-Term Evaluation of Clinical Effect of Bone Ring Grafting and Immediate Insertion].

Single immediate implant placement in the maxillary aesthetic zone with and without connective tissue grafting: Results of a 5‐year randomized controlled trial

Profilometric, esthetic, and patient‐reported outcomes of the L‐shape technique combined with delayed connective tissue grafting in the maxillary anterior region: A 3‐year case series study

[Dental implantation and soft tissue augmentation after ridge preservation in a molar site: a case report]

Outcomes of Connective Tissue (CT) Graft on Periodontal Health in Relation to Dental Implants Placed in Esthetic Zone of Anterior Maxilla

Comparing Bone Alteration and Aesthetic Recovery Between the Socket-Shield Technique and the Conventional Immediate Implant Technique: A Retrospective Study

Clinical Study of Flapless Immediate Implant Placement and Immediate Restoration of Single Tooth in the Oral Aesthetic Region

[Short-Term Clinical Efficacy of a Collagen Matrix and Free Gingival Graft in Augmenting Keratinized Mucosa Around Dental Implants].

Effect of CAD/CAM Guide Plate Combined With Socket-Shield Technique in Immediate Implantation of Anterior Teeth Aesthetic Area and Its Influence on Aesthetics