You are currently viewing Implante dentário imediato na zona estética associado à técnica de retenção intencional do fragmento radicular: relato de caso clínico com 18 meses de acompanhamento

Implante dentário imediato na zona estética associado à técnica de retenção intencional do fragmento radicular: relato de caso clínico com 18 meses de acompanhamento

RESUMO

O objetivo deste caso clínico foi demonstrar a possibilidade e efetividade da terapia de remoção parcial da raiz, denominada técnica da retenção intencional do fragmento radicular (TRFR). Uma paciente com 32 anos de idade apresentou-se com mobilidade e giroversão do dente 21. Após uma TCFC, foi constatada fratura. Realizadas assepsia e anestesia local, a raiz foi seccionada no sentido mesiodistal e o fragmento palatino foi removido com o auxílio de periótomo e alavanca. A osteotomia foi realizada conforme as orientações da técnica, e o espaço entre o fragmento radicular vestibular e o implante dentário foi preenchido com osso xenogênico. Então, um munhão foi conectado ao implante e a coroa temporária foi feita com a prótese antiga da paciente. Os controles clínicos e de TCFC mostraram normalidade nos tecidos duros e moles após oito meses. A TRFR com manutenção do tecido periodontal pode levar a uma previsível osseointegração do implante instalado de forma imediata na região anterior da maxila, sendo um método confiável para reduzir a perda de osso vestibular após a exodontia. Esta apurada técnica exige experiência clínica para ser realizada adequadamente. Além disso, torna-se necessário que estudos clínicos controlados sejam direcionados a esta modalidade de tratamento, para haver um maior controle da espessura do fragmento radicular nos estudos clínicos.

Palavras-chave – Implante dental; Implante imediato; Reabsorção óssea; Terapia parcial de extração.


ABSTRACT

The aim of this case report was to demonstrate the possibility and effectiveness of partial root extraction therapy called the unintentional root fragment retention (URFR). A 32 years-old patient presented to with giroversion and mobility of tooth 21. After CBCT exam, dental fracture was detected. Upon local asepsis and anesthesia, the root was sectioned in the mesio-distal direction, and its palatal fragment was removed with the aid of the periotome and levers. The osteotomy was made according this technique, and the space between the buccal fragment and the dental implant filled with xenogeneic biomaterial. Then, a prosthetic transmucosal element was connected to the dental implant and a temporary restoration made with the own’s patient old prosthesis. Clinical and CBCT exams demonstrated soft and hard tissue normality 8 months later. The URFR associated to the periodontal maintenance can lead to a predictable osseointegration of the immediate implant in the anterior maxillary region, being a reliable method to alleviate buccal bone loss after tooth extraction. However, it demands clinical experience to be adequately performed. Besides, it is necessary to have more controlled clinical trials using this modality to generate more data regarding control on the thickness of the root fragment.

Key words – Dental implant; Immediate implant; Bone resorption; Partial extraction therapy.

Referências

  1. Araújo MG, Lindhe J. Dimensional ridge alterations following tooth extraction. An experimental study in the dog. J Clin Periodontol 2005;32(2):212-8.
  2. Araújo MG, Sukekava F, Wennström JL, Lindhe J. Tissue modeling following implant placement in fresh extraction sockets. Clin Oral Implants Res 2006;17(6):615-24.
  3. Schropp L, Wenzel A, Kostopoulos L, Karring T. Bone healing and soft tissue contour changes following single-tooth extraction: a clinical and radiographic 12-month prospective study. Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent 2003;23(4):313-23.
  4. Braut V, Bornstein MM, Belser U, Buser D. Thickness of the anterior maxillary facial bone wall-a retrospective radiographic study using cone beam computed tomography. Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent 2011;31(2):125-31.
  5. Spray JR, Black CG, Morris HF, Ochi S. The influence of bone thickness on facial marginal bone response: stage 1 placement through stage 2 uncovering. Ann Periodontol 2000;5(1):119-28.
  6. Cardaropoli D, Cardaropoli G. Preservation of the post extraction alveolar ridge: a clinical and histologic study. Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent 2008;28(5):469-77.
  7. Chu SJ, Salama MA, Salama H, Garber DA, Saito H, Sarnachiaro GO et al. The dual-zone therapeutic concept of managing immediate implant placement and provisional restoration in anterior extraction sockets. Compend Contin Educ Dent 2012;33(7):524-32,534.
  8. Glocker M, Attin T, Schmidlin PR. Ridge preservation with modified “socket-shield” technique: a methodological case series. Dent J 2014;2:11-21.
  9. Salama M, Ishikawa T, Salama H, Funato A, Garber D. Advantages of the root submergence technique for pontic site development in esthetic implant therapy. Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent 2007;27(6):521-7.
  10. Gluckman H, Du Toit J, Salama M. The pontic-shield: partial extraction therapy for ridge preservation and pontic site development. Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent 2016;36(3):417-23.
  11. Mitsias ME, Siormpas KD, Kotsakis GA, Ganz SD, Mangano C, Iezzi G. The root membrane technique: human histologic evidence after five years of function. Biomed Res Int 2017;2017:7269467.
  12. Mitsias ME, Siormpas KD, Kontsiotou-Siormpa E, Prasad H, Garber D, Kotsakis GA. A step-by-step description of pdl-mediated ridge preservation for immediate implant rehabilitation in the esthetic region. Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent 2015;35(6):835-41.
  13. Hürzeler MB, Zuhr O, Schupbach P, Rebele SF, Emmanouilidis N, Fickl S. The socket-shield technique: a proof-of-principle report. J Clin Periodontol 2010;37(9):855-62.
  14. Bramanti E, Norcia A, Cicciù M, Matacena G, Cervino G, Troiano G et al. Post extraction dental implant in the aesthetic zone, socket shield technique versus conventional protocol. J Craniofac Surg 2018;29(4):1037-41.
  15. Siormpas KD, Mitsias ME, Kontsiotou-Siormpa E, Garber D, Kotsakis GA. Immediate implant placement in the esthetic zone utilizing the “root-membrane” technique: clinical results up to 5 years postloading. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2014;29(6):1397-405.
  16. Siormpas KD, Mitsias ME, Kotsakis GA, Tawil I, Pikos MA, Mangano FG. The root membrane technique: a retrospective clinical study with up to 10 years of follow-up. Implant Dent 2018;27(5):564-74.
  17. Gluckman H, Salama M, Du Toit J. Partial extraction therapies (PET) Part 1: maintaining alveolar ridge contour at pontic and immediate implant sites. Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent 2016;36(5):681-7.
  18. Gluckman H, Salama M, Du Toit J. Partial extraction therapies (pet) Part 2: procedures and technical aspects. Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent 2017;37(3):377-85.
  19. Gluckman H, Salama M, Du Toit J. A retrospective evaluation of 128 socket-shield cases in the esthetic zone and posterior sites: partial extraction therapy with up to 4 years follow-up. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res 2018;20(2):122-9.
  20. Huang H, Shu L, Liu Y, Wang L, Li J, Fu G. Immediate implant combined with modified socket-shield technique: a case letter. J Oral Implantol 2017;43(2):139-43.
  21. Saeidi Pour R, Zuhr O, Hürzeler M, Prandtner O, Rafael CF, Edelhoff D et al. Clinical benefits of the immediate implant socket shield technique. J Esthet Restor Dent 2017;29(2):93-101.
  22. Abd-Elrahman A, Shaheen M, Askar N, Atef M. Socket shield technique vs conventional immediate implant placement with immediate temporization. Randomized clinical trial. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res 2020;22(5):602-11.
  23. Blaschke C, Schwass DR. The socket-shield technique: a critical literature review. Int J Implant Dent 2020;6(1):52.
  24. Tan Z, Kang J, Liu W, Wang H. The effect of the heights and thicknesses of the remaining root segments on buccal bone resorption in the socket-shield technique: an experimental study in dogs. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res 2018;20(3):352-9.
  25. Bäumer D, Zuhr O, Rebele S, Schneider D, Schupbach P, Hürzeler M. The socket-shield technique: first histological, clinical, and volumetrical observations after separation of the buccal tooth segment – a pilot study. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res 2015;17(1):71-82.
  26. Bäumer D, Zuhr O, Rebele S, Hürzeler M. Socket shield technique for immediate implant placement – clinical, radiographic and volumetric data after 5 years. Clin Oral Implants Res 2017;28(11):1450-8.
  27. Zhang Z, Dong Y, Yang J, Xu R, Deng F. Effect of socket-shield technique on alveolar ridge soft and hard tissue in dogs. J Clin Periodontol 2019;46(2):256-63.
  28. Schwimer C, Pette GA, Gluckman H, Salama M, Du Toit J. Human histologic evidence of new bone formation and osseointegration between root dentin (unplanned socket-shield) and dental implant: case report. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2018;33(1):e19-e23.
  29. Calvo-Guirado JL, Benítez-García JA, Maté Sánchez de Val JE, Pérez-Albacete Martínez C, Gehrke SA, Delgado-Ruiz R et al. Socket-shield technique: the influence of the length of the remaining buccal segment of healthy tooth structure on peri-implant bone and socket preservation. A study in dogs. Ann Anat 2019;221:84-92.
Tags: ,