Minimal invasiveness in the alveolar ridge preservation, with or without concomitant implant placement

• Published in: Periodontology 2000 Vol. 91; no. 1; pp. 65 - 88
• Main Authors: Araújo, Maurício G., Hürzeler, Markus B., Dias, Debora R., Matarazzo, Flavia
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: Denmark 01.02.2023
• Subjects: Alveolar Process; Alveolar Ridge Augmentation; alveolar ridge preservation; esthetics; Humans; immediate implant placement; minimally invasive surgery; morbidity; patient reported outcome measures; Tooth Extraction; Tooth Socket - surgery; wound healing; immediate implant placement; wound healing; alveolar ridge preservation; minimally invasive surgery; patient reported outcome measures; morbidity; esthetics
• ISSN: 0906-6713; 1600-0757
• DOI: 10.1111/prd.12441

The aim of this systematic review was to evaluate the benefit of ridge preservation (RP) with minimally invasive (MI) approaches with or without concomitant implant placement on morbidity, esthetics, and patient‐related outcomes. Three Internet sources were used to search for appropriate papers. The search strategy was designed to include any clinical study published on RP with MI approaches such as flapless surgery, socket shield and socket sealing techniques and, use of biological agents. Characteristics of the individual studies, regarding methodological aspects, quantitative and qualitative data were extracted. The potential risk of bias was estimated, and the acquired evidence was graded. Independent screening of 860 reports resulted in 26 included original articles. Nine publications evaluated MI approaches for RP without concomitant implant placement. Eleven studies evaluated interventions for RP with immediate implant placement (IIP). Six studies compared RP with IIP vs RP without IIP. This systematic review found that MI approaches in most of the studies failed to improve clinical variables regarding morbidity, esthetics, and patient‐related outcomes. Based on the limited number of studies analyzed and the methodological discrepancies observed, it is not possible to confirm that MI approaches promote a significant benefit when applied to RP procedures.