Abstract:Background: It is unclear whether an intact buccal bony plate is a prerequisite for immediate implant placement in postextraction sockets. The aim of this 10-year randomized controlled trial was to compare peri-implant soft and hard tissue parameters, esthetic ratings of, and patient-reported satisfaction with immediate implant placement in postextraction sockets with buccal bony defects ≥5 mm in the esthetic zone versus delayed implant placement after alveolar ridge preservation. Methods: Patients presenting a failing tooth in the esthetic region and a buccal bony defect ≥5 mm after an extraction were randomly assigned to immediate (Immediate Group, n = 20) or delayed (Delayed Group, n = 20) implant placement. The second-stage surgery and provisional restoration placement occurred 3 months after implant placement in both groups, followed by definitive restorations 3 months thereafter. During a 10-year follow-up period, marginal bone levels (primary outcome), buccal bone thickness, soft tissue parameters, esthetics, and patient-reported satisfaction were recorded. Results: The mean marginal bone level change was -0.71 ± 0.59 mm and -0.36 ± 0.39 mm in the Immediate Group and the Delayed Group after 10 years (p = 0.063), respectively. The secondary outcomes were not significantly different between both groups. Conclusions: Marginal bone level changes, buccal bone thickness, clinical outcomes, esthetics, and patients' satisfaction following immediate implant placement, in combination with bone augmentation in postextraction sockets with buccal bony defects ≥5 mm, were not statistically different to those following delayed implant placement after ridge preservation in the esthetic zone. Plain language summary: Immediate implant placement in case of a failing tooth is a favorable treatment option for patients because it considerably shortens treatment time and the number of surgical treatments. The question is if an intact buccal bone wall is necessary for immediate implant placement. A 10-year study was performed in which 20 patients with a failing tooth in the frontal region of the upper jaw were treated with immediate implant placement and were compared with 20 patients in whom a more conventional treatment strategy was followed in which the failing tooth was first removed and the bone gap restored and the implant placed in a second step. After a 10-year follow-up period, it appeared that the bone around the implant was very stable, gums were healthy, and patients were very satisfied with the result. There was no difference between the two treatment procedures. Such results mean that professionals can discuss the procedure with the patient and apply the individual's preference.

Soft tissue contour and radiographic evaluation of ridge preservation in early implant placement: A randomized controlled clinical trial

The effect of different soft-tissue management techniques for alveolar ridge preservation: a randomized controlled clinical trial

Combined use of xenogeneic bone substitute material covered with a native bilayer collagen membrane for alveolar ridge preservation: A randomized controlled clinical trial.

Early implant placement with or without alveolar ridge preservation in single tooth gaps renders similar esthetic, clinical and patient-reported outcome measures: One-year results of a randomized clinical trial

Tissue changes around dental implants installed in alveolar ridge preservation sites: A 1‐year follow‐up randomized controlled clinical trial

Hard and soft tissue alterations during the healing stage of immediate implant placement and provisionalization with or without connective tissue graft: A randomized clinical trial

Preservation and Augmentation of Molar Extraction Sites Affected by Severe Bone Defect Due to Advanced Periodontitis: A Prospective Clinical Trial

Preservation of Alveolar Ridge using Graft Material after Tooth Extraction: A Clinical Trial

Histological Evaluation of Alveolar Ridge Preservation Using Different Bone Grafts: Clinical Study Analysis Part II

[Application of xenograft for alveolar ridge preservation in posterior sites: a randomized controlled clinical trial]

Alveolar Ridge Preservation Using a Collagenated Xenograft: A Randomized Clinical Trial

Effect of different platelet-rich fibrin matrices for ridge preservation in multiple tooth extractions: A split-mouth randomized controlled clinical trial

A Randomized Controlled Trial Comparing Collagen Matrix to Hemostatic Gelatin Sponge as Socket Seal in Alveolar Ridge Preservation

Three-dimensional analysis of bone remodeling following ridge augmentation of compromised extraction sockets in periodontitis patients: A randomized controlled study

Long-term preservation of ridge dimension following tooth extraction and ridge preservation: A randomized controlled trial of healing at 4- and 12-month healing time points

Alveolar Ridge Preservation With Fibro-Gide or Connective Tissue Graft: A Randomized Controlled Trial of Soft and Hard Tissue Changes

The impact of autologous concentrated growth factors on the alveolar ridge preservation after posterior tooth extraction: A prospective, randomized controlled clinical trial

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

[Radiographic Evaluation of Ridge Preservation after Molar Tooth Extraction: a Controlled Clinical Trial].

Half‐ and full‐grafting alveolar ridge preservation with different sealing materials: A three‐arm randomized clinical trial

Immediate single-tooth implant placement in bony defect sites: A 10-year randomized controlled trial