| Title |
Soft tissue augmentation around osseointegrated and uncovered dental implants: a systematic review
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Clinical Oral Investigations, November 2016
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s00784-016-2007-9 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Renzo G. Bassetti, Alexandra Stähli, Mario A. Bassetti, Anton Sculean |
| Abstract |
The aim was to compile the current knowledge about the efficacy of different soft tissue correction methods around osseointegrated, already uncovered and/or loaded (OU/L) implants with insufficient soft tissue conditions. Procedures to increase peri-implant keratinized mucosa (KM) width and/or soft tissue volume were considered. Screening of two databases: MEDLINE (PubMed) and EMBASE (OVID), and manual search of articles were performed. Human studies reporting on soft tissue augmentation/correction methods around OU/L implants up to June 30, 2016, were considered. Quality assessment of selected full-text articles to weight risk of bias was performed using the Cochrane collaboration's tool. Overall, four randomized controlled trials (risk of bias = high/low) and five prospective studies (risk of bias = high) were included. Depending on the surgical techniques and graft materials, the enlargement of keratinized tissue (KT) ranged between 1.15 ± 0.81 and 2.57 ± 0.50 mm. The apically positioned partial thickness flap (APPTF), in combination with a free gingival graft (FGG), a subepithelial connective tissue graft (SCTG), or a xenogeneic graft material (XCM) were most effective. A coronally advanced flap (CAF) combined with SCTG in three, combined with allogenic graft materials (AMDA) in one, and a split thickness flap (STF) combined with SCTG in another study showed mean soft tissue recession coverage rates from 28 to 96.3 %. STF combined with XCM failed to improve peri-implant soft tissue coverage. The three APPTF-techniques combined with FGG, SCTG, or XCM achieved comparable enlargements of peri-implant KT. Further, both STF and CAF, both in combination with SCTG, are equivalent regarding recession coverage rates. STF + XCM and CAF + AMDA did not reach significant coverage. In case of soft tissue deficiency around OU/L dental implants, the selection of both an appropriate surgical technique and a suitable soft tissue graft material is of utmost clinical relevance. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Spain | 2 | 50% |
| Côte d'Ivoire | 1 | 25% |
| Unknown | 1 | 25% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 4 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 228 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 228 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 38 | 17% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 35 | 15% |
| Student > Bachelor | 18 | 8% |
| Researcher | 16 | 7% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 15 | 7% |
| Other | 38 | 17% |
| Unknown | 68 | 30% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 132 | 58% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 5 | 2% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 3 | 1% |
| Unspecified | 2 | <1% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 2 | <1% |
| Other | 6 | 3% |
| Unknown | 78 | 34% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 29 September 2017.
All research outputs
#15,852,371
of 25,543,275 outputs
Outputs from Clinical Oral Investigations
#619
of 1,596 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#231,553
of 416,211 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Clinical Oral Investigations
#7
of 13 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,543,275 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 36th percentile – i.e., 36% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,596 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.9. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 60% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 416,211 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 13 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 53% of its contemporaries.