Buccal bone plate stability after immediate implant placement and loading: A 10-year radiographic evaluation - 11/06/26

Abstract |
Introduction |
Immediate implant placement and loading have been proposed to preserve peri‑implant tissues and optimize esthetic outcomes. However, long-term data regarding buccal bone plate stability and the association between baseline buccal bone thickness and long-term dimensional outcomes remain limited.
To evaluate 10-year changes in buccal bone thickness measured 2 mm apical to the implant shoulder (tBB_2mm) following immediate implant placement and loading, and to assess the association of surgically measured baseline buccal bone thickness with 10-year outcomes.
Materials and methods |
This retrospective cohort study included patients treated with single immediate implants and provisional restorations between 2013 and 2015. Cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) scans obtained at mid-term evaluation (T1) and at 10-year follow-up (T2) were analyzed. Sites were divided according to surgically measured baseline buccal bone thickness into Group A (>2 mm) and Group B (≤2 mm). The primary outcome was the change in buccal bone thickness between the mid- (T1) and long-term (T2) CBCT evaluation (Δ tBB_2mm). Secondary outcomes included palatal bone thickness and vertical peri‑implant bone parameters. Nonparametric tests were used for inter- and intra-group comparisons. An ANCOVA model was performed to adjust for baseline thickness. Level of significance was set at 0.05.
Results |
Forty-seven implants were analyzed. At T1, Group A exhibited significantly greater buccal bone thickness compared with Group B (median 2.2 mm vs 0.5 mm; p < 0.001), and this difference persisted at T2 (2.0 mm vs 0.4 mm; p < 0.001). Although both groups showed slight reductions over time, the magnitude of Δ tBB_2mm did not significantly differ between groups (p = 0.138). In the adjusted model, mid-term buccal bone thickness at T1 was the only significant predictor associated with T2 thickness (p < 0.001), whereas group allocation was not independently associated with the outcome (p = 0.107). Vertical buccal bone coverage was greater in Group A at T2 (p < 0.001), while palatal parameters showed no intergroup differences.
Discussion |
Baseline buccal bone thickness was significantly associated with long-term buccal bone dimensions following immediate implant placement and loading. Dimensional differences between groups were established early and remained stable over 10 years, with limited additional remodeling.
Le texte complet de cet article est disponible en PDF.Keywords : Buccal bone thickness, Dental implant, Bone remodeling
Plan
Vol 127 - N° 6
Article 102864- décembre 2026 Retour au numéroBienvenue sur EM-consulte, la référence des professionnels de santé.
L’accès au texte intégral de cet article nécessite un abonnement.
Déjà abonné à cette revue ?
