Geistlich - Indication sheets E - Extraction Sockets | Page 3

3. Surgical procedure Background Information This 28-year-old patient was referred to manage the replacement of the upper left central incisor (21) with an implant supported restoration. The tooth was causing symptoms of intermittent pain. When she was 12 years of age, she fell and traumatised teeth 12, 11 and 21. The 21 was avulsed and reimplanted. Subsequently 11 and 21 required endodontic treatment. The crown of 12 gradually darkened over time, but endodontic treatment was not required. She presented with a high lip line and medium tissue biotype. Her aesthetics expectations were high. A closer examination of 21 indicated an area of erythema on the mesiobuccal aspect of the tooth in association with a midline papilla and the presence of a cervical resorptive lesion on the mesial aspect. An aesthetic risk assessment (ERA) using the ITI’s online Aesthetic Assessment tool confirmed that the treatment to replace this tooth was complex. Of particular risk was the potential for blunting or loss of the papilla due to the location of the region of external root resorption. The following treatment plan was proposed: > Extraction of tooth 21 and placement of an implant 8 weeks later in accordance with an early implant placement protocol. This approach was selected due to the high aesthetic demand and the need to maximise volume and thickness of the peri-implant soft tissues, as well as to protect the bone graft which will be required as part of the treatment. Fig. 1 This 28-year-old patient was referred to manage the replacement of the upper left central incisor (21) with an implant supported restoration. > Furthermore, it was planned for the socket to be grafted with Geistlich Bio-Oss® Collagen and Geistlich Mucograft® Seal at the time of extraction to minimise post extraction dimensional changes.1 Due to the limited orofacial bone width, this ridge preservation procedure was recommended to ensure that the subsequent implant could be placed in the correct orofacial positioning and with sufficient supporting bone. The 28-year-old Patient's Risk Profile 2. Aims of the therapy Primary objective following the extraction: > Flapless extraction without shift of the mucogingival line >R  idge Preservation with Geistlich Bio-Oss® Collagen and Geistlich Mucograft® Seal to minimise post extraction dimensional changes > Minimise contour augmentation surgery at the time of implant placement Secondary objectives during and after the implantation: > Implantation in the correct 3-dimensional position and with sufficient supporting bone > Local contour augmentation in the facial region with Geistlich Bio-Oss® granules and Geistlich Bio-Gide® > Aesthetic restoration with screw-retained implant crown Fig. 2 Close up showing an area of erythema on the mesiobuccal aspect of the tooth in association with the midline papilla. Aesthetic Risk Assessment Low Medical status Healthy Smoking habits Non-smoker Light smoker (≤ 10 cigarettes per day) Heavy smoker (> 10 cigarettes per day) Patient's aesthetic expectations Low Moderate High Smile line Low Medium High Gingival biotype Thick biotype, low-scalloped Medium scalloped, medium thick Thin biotype, high scalloped Tooth crown shape Rectangular Alveolar infection status Infection-free Chronic infection Acute infection Bone level of the adjacent teeth ≤ 5 mm to contact point 5.5 to 6.5 mm to contact point ≥ 7 mm to contact point Restoration status of the adjacent teeth Natural Gap breadth Single tooth gap (> 7 mm) Soft tissue anatomy Intact soft tissue Bone anatomy Alveolar ridge with no bony defect Fig. 3b CBCT examination of 21 revealed that the alveolar process was narrower orofacially. The facial bone was thin. The palatal and apical bone volume was also rather limited. 2 Fig. 3a Intraoral radiographic examination confirmed the presence of a cervical resorptive lesion on the mesial aspect. Moderate Fig. 7 After thorough debridement of the granulation tissue, Geistlich Bio-Oss® Collagen was then prepared for grafting into the socket. The Geistlich Bio-Oss® Collagen was soaked in sterile saline to hydrate the graft. Subsequently, the graft was placed into the socket and gently tamped with a flat ended instrument. Fig. 8 A piece of Geistlich Mucograft® Seal placed over the graft within the confines of the socket and sutured into place with a combination of continuous and interrupted sutures. At this time, it is important that the Gesitlich Mucograft® Seal is absorbed with blood from the site to establish a clot. Fig. 9 8 weeks after extraction and grafting, the 21 site had healed uneventfully. A slight invagination over the crest of the ridge was noted. However the soft tissues had completely regenerated over the socket and graft. Fig. 10 A CBCT at this time point, showed the presence of the graft in the socket and maintenance of the orofacial dimension of the ridge. Fig. 11 Surgical re-entry was then performed for the placement of a dental implant. Intraoperative view revealed the situation at the time of surgery. The Geistlich Bio-Oss® Collagen could be seen within the original socket and was well incorporated into the site. Fig. 12 Following preparation of the osteotomy, maintenance of thick bone walls on both the facial and palatal aspect could be observed. Fig. 13 A guide pin inserted into the osteotomy confirmed the ideal orofacial and mesiodistal position of the preparation. Fig. 14 Buccal view following insertion of the implant confirmed the ideal apicocoronal position of the implant shoulder. Thus, the principle of placing the implant into the correct three-dimensional position was observed. Fig. 15 A 2 mm healing abutment was then attached to the implant and additional grafting onto the buccal aspect of the ridge was completed. The graft consisted of Geistlich Bio-Oss® reconstituted with venous blood. This graft was required for additional augmentation to reconstruct the facial contour of the ridge, which is necessary to achieve an optimum aesthetic result in the front region. Fig. 16 Two layers of Geistlich Bio-Gide® were applied to protect and to stabilise the graft. Fig. 17 The base of the flap was released to allow slight coronal repositioning for primary closure. High Reduced immune system Triangular Res F