الفهرس 
Clinical evaluation of pink esthetic score following delayed implant placement with connective tissue graft with and without temporization in the maxillary esthetiic zone with thin gingival biotype
Abstract EnglishOnly 14 pages are availabe for public view
 |  | from | 169 |  |  |
| | | from | 169 | | |
Abstract
Aim: Investigating the effect of immediate temporization on the pink esthetics in delayed implants in patients with thin gingival biotype associated with subepithelial connective tissue graft in the maxillary esthetic zone. Methodology: 16 patients were enrolled in the study, each with one upper missing tooth in the esthetic zone and were randomly assigned as 8 participants in either the test group (delayed implant with connective tissue graft and immediate temporization) or the control group (delayed with connective tissue graft only), the pink esthetics was assessed as the primary outcome and the keratinized tissue width, soft tissue thickness, swelling and patient satisfaction were assessed as the secondary outcomes. Results: 16 implants were placed in 16 patients; 8 implants per group, two implants had early failure, one in the intervention group and one in the control group. No patients were lost to follow up and all of them completed their 9 months follow up after the delivery of the final crown.Two different blinded examiners took the readings due to the subjective nature of the PES outcome and an average between the two scores was calculated. The intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) between them was 0.92; there was no statistical vii difference between our test and control groups after 1 year as they showed PE11.79 (1.19) and 11.29 (1.15) respectively. Regarding the keratinized tissue width there was no significant difference between the two groups 4.86 (0.24) and 4.57 (0.45) at 12 months FU, yet there there was a significance intragroup through time from the baseline 4.07 (0.19) and 3.86 (0.63) for the test and the control group respectively. As for the soft tissue thickness, the augmentation procedure was successful in both groups after 12 months follow up, the soft tissue thickness was 2.29 (0.57) at 2mm, 2.43 (0.35) at 4mm and 2.43 (0.35) at 6 mm, while it was 2.14 (0.48) at 2 mm from the gingival. margin, 2.43 (0.35) at 4 mm and 2.29 (0.27) at 6 mm at the test and the control group respectively. All patients demonstrated high satisfaction for both treatment modalities