To compare the effects of bone grafting materials, collagen-infused grafting materials, and no grafting materials on the soft and hard tissue outcomes when an immediate implant is placed.

In addition to hand searching, electronic searches were performed in Pubmed, Embase, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL). Only RCTs were included in our review. The Cochrane ROB 2.0 tool was used to assess the risk of bias (ROB). Two subgroups were used to evaluate implant failure rate, buccal bone resorption, soft tissue thickness, and esthetic scores. In the meta-analysis, both the fixed-effects model and the random-effects model were employed.

7 RCTs were selected after screening 580 studies, and 205 patients were included in the review, with 279 implants. Two RCTs were at low bias of risk, three were at moderate bias, and two were deemed at high risk of bias. The failure rate (95% CI: 0.17 to 11.84) and soft tissue thickness were not significantly different between collagen with bone grafting materials and without bone grafting materials. On the basis of the failure rate and buccal bone thickness, there was no significant difference between collagen with bone grafting materials and bone grafting materials. While we found collagen with bone grafting materials could have a significant advantage on the buccal bone thickness (MD: −0.43,95% CI −0.72 to −0.41) and esthetic outcome (MD: −1.23,95% CI −1.90 to −0.55).

In the statement of immediate implant implantation, the thickness of the buccal bone and esthetic outcomes did significantly benefit from bone grafting materials with collagen inserted in the “jumping gap”.