Int J Stomatol

Int J Stomatol ›› 2022, Vol. 49 ›› Issue (5): 537-547.doi: 10.7518/gjkq.2022087

• Original Articles • Previous Articles     Next Articles

The socket-shield technique for immediate implant placement： a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

Gong Jiaming1,2(),Zhao Ruimin1,2,Li Wanxin1,Su Linhan2,Yu Zhanhai1,Li Jianxue2()   

  1. 1.Dept. of Implantology, School & Hospital of Stomatology, Lanzhou University, Lanzhou 730000, China
    2.Dept. of Stomatology, The 940th Hospital of Joint Logistics Support Force of People’s Liberation Army, Lanzhou 730050, China
  • Received:2022-01-05 Revised:2022-05-20 Online:2022-09-01 Published:2022-09-16
  • Contact: Jianxue Li E-mail:gongjm19@lzu.edu.cn;370816151@qq.com
  • Supported by:
    Natural Science Foundation of Gansu Province(20JR10RA006)

RichHTML

82

PDF (PC)

717

Abstract:

Objective To systematically evaluate and compare the clinical effect of immediate implant placement with socket-shield technique (SST) and conventional immediate implant (CII). Methods Databases in PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, CNKI, and Wanfang were searched to identify randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that compared SST and CII， and citation indexes were carried out for the critical pieces of literature from May 2010 to November 2021. The Cochrane Collaboration’s tool was used to assess the risk of bias. Data were analyzed using the Review Manager 5.4 software. To discuss the effects of two techniques on the clinical performance of peri-implant soft and hard tissue, implant stability quotient (ISQ), and complications and failure rate. Results A total of 14 RCTs were inclu-ded in this study, including eight in English and six in Chinese. Follow-ups ranged from 6 to 36 months, with an average of 14.21 months. Meta-analysis showed that the SST group resulted in a significantly lesser labial bone plate changes (P<0.05), stabler margin bone level (P<0.05), and better esthetic presentation (P<0.05), except for the ISQ (P>0.05). How-ever, there were no significant differences in complications and implant failure rates between the two groups (P>0.05). Conclusion In the immediate implant placement procedure, employing SST has medium- to short-term positive effects on reducing the peri-implant bone resorption and maintaining the soft tissue morphology. To supervise the current manifestation, further evidence from long-term RCTs is needed.

Key words: immediate implant, socket shield technique, bone loss, pink esthetics, meta-analysis

CLC Number: 

  • R 783

TrendMD: 

Fig 1

Literature screening flow chart"

Tab 1

Characteristics of included studies"

纳入研究

（发表时间）

国家研究类型

种植

位点

种植体型号

（品牌/尺寸）

患者/种植体数临床干预随访时间/月主要结局指标次要结局指标
植骨程序修复程序
SSTCII
SSTCII
Abd-Elrahman等[24]（2020）埃及RCT美学区

Titan Industries/

直径3.3、3.7 mm，

长度14、16 mm

NR/20NR/20NN即刻修复6①②④⑤⑥⑦
Atef等[25]（2021）埃及RCT美学区NR21/2121/21NXenograft Tutobone

术后

4个月

12①②⑤⑥⑦
Bramanti等[27]（2018）意大利RCT美学区NR20/2020/20NAllograft CopiOs即刻修复36③⑤⑥⑦
Barakat等[26]（2017）埃及RCT

上颌

前牙区

Dentium superline/

直径3.6~5.8 mm，

长度7~14 mm

10/1010/10NN

术后

4个月

7①②④⑥⑦
Fattouh[29]（2018）埃及RCT

上颌

美学区

NR/直径4.1 mm，

长度13 mm

10/1010/10NBio-Oss Spongiosa+Bio-Gide即刻修复12③⑤⑥⑦

Hana等[30]

（2020）

伊拉克RCT

上颌

前牙区

NR20/2020/20NN即刻修复12NR⑤⑥⑦
Sun等[28]（2020）中国RCT

前牙

美学区

Nobel Replace?cc/NR15/1515/15间隙>1 mm则放置Bio-Oss

间隙>1 mm则

放置Bio-Oss

即刻修复24①②⑤⑥⑦
Tiwari等[31]（2019）印度RCT

上颌

前牙区

NR8/88/8NN

术后

4个月

12①②⑦
秦蓉等[33]（2021）中国RCT

上颌

前牙区

NR35/3535/35间隙>1 mm则放置Bio-OssBio-Oss

术后

6个月

12NR⑤⑥⑦
李云杉[32]（2021）中国RCT

上颌

前牙区

ITI/NR40/4040/40Bio-OssBio-OssNR12①④⑤⑦
张宾等[36]（2020）中国RCT

上颌

前牙区

Zimmer/NR30/3030/30Bio-OssBio-Oss即刻修复12①⑤⑥⑦
谭蕾等[35]（2019）中国RCT

前牙

美学区

NR15/1515/15NN即刻修复6①②④
闫圣杰[37]（2019）中国RCT

上颌

前牙区

NR12/1314/15间隙>1 mm则放置Bio-OssBio-Oss

术后

6个月

12①⑤⑥⑦
张超等[34]（2021）中国RCT前牙区NR31/3132/32

Bio-Oss+

Bio-Gide

Bio-Oss+

Bio-Gide

NR24①②④⑤⑥⑦

Fig 2

Risk of bias in included studies"

Fig 3

Meta-analysis of changes in labial bone width between the two groups during different follow-up periods"

Fig 4

Meta-analysis of changes in labial bone height at 6 and 12 months between the two groups"

Fig 5

Meta-analysis of peri-implant bone levels at 6 months between the two groups"

Fig 6

Meta-analysis of ISQ at 6 and 12 months between the two groups"

Fig 7

Meta-analysis of PES between the two groups during different follow-up periods"

Fig 8

Meta-analysis of complications between the two groups"

Fig 9

Meta-analysis of implant failure rates between the two groups"

1 Araújo MG, Lindhe J. Dimensional ridge alterations following tooth extraction. An experimental study in the dog[J]. J Clin Periodontol, 2005, 32(2): 212-218.
2 Cardaropoli G, Araújo M, Lindhe J. Dynamics of bone tissue formation in tooth extraction sites. An experimental study in dogs[J]. J Clin Periodontol, 2003, 30(9): 809-818.
3 Tan WL, Wong TL, Wong MC, et al. A systematic review of post-extractional alveolar hard and soft tissue dimensional changes in humans[J]. Clin Oral Implants Res, 2012, 23(): 1-21.
4 Araújo MG, Silva CO, Misawa M, et al. Alveolar socket healing: what can we learn[J]. Periodontol 2000, 2015, 68(1): 122-134.
5 Paolantonio M, Dolci M, Scarano A, et al. Immedia-te implantation in fresh extraction sockets. A controlled clinical and histological study in man[J]. J Periodontol, 2001, 72(11): 1560-1571.
6 Sclar AG. Preserving alveolar ridge anatomy follo-wing tooth removal in conjunction with immediate implant placement. The Bio-Col technique[J]. Atlas Oral Maxillofac Surg Clin North Am, 1999, 7(2): 39-59.
7 Araújo MG, Sukekava F, Wennström JL, et al. Tissue modeling following implant placement in fresh extraction sockets[J]. Clin Oral Implants Res, 2006, 17(6): 615-624.
8 Araújo MG, Wennström JL, Lindhe J. Modeling of the buccal and lingual bone walls of fresh extraction sites following implant installation[J]. Clin Oral Implants Res, 2006, 17(6): 606-614.
9 Araújo M, Linder E, Wennström J, et al. The in-fluence of Bio-Oss Collagen on healing of an extraction socket: an experimental study in the dog[J]. Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent, 2008, 28(2): 123-135.
10 Jung RE, Ioannidis A, Hämmerle CHF, et al. Alveolar ridge preservation in the esthetic zone[J]. Perio-dontol 2000, 2018, 77(1): 165-175.
11 Urban IA, Monje A. Guided bone regeneration in alveolar bone reconstruction[J]. Oral Maxillofac Surg Clin North Am, 2019, 31(2): 331-338.
12 Retzepi M, Donos N. Guided bone regeneration: bio-logical principle and therapeutic applications[J]. Clin Oral Implants Res, 2010, 21(6): 567-576.
13 Chen ST, Buser D. Esthetic outcomes following immediate and early implant placement in the anterior maxilla: a systematic review[J]. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants, 2014, 29(): 186-215.
14 Giannobile WV, Jung RE, Schwarz F, et al. Evidence-based knowledge on the aesthetics and maintenance of peri-implant soft tissues: Osteology Foundation Consensus Report Part 1-effects of soft tissue augmentation procedures on the maintenance of peri-implant soft tissue health[J]. Clin Oral Implants Res, 2018, 29(): 7-10.
15 Hürzeler MB, Zuhr O, Schupbach P, et al. The soc-ket-shield technique: a proof-of-principle report[J]. J Clin Periodontol, 2010, 37(9): 855-862.
16 Mourya A, Mishra SK, Gaddale R, et al. Socket-shield technique for implant placement to stabilize the facial gingival and osseous architecture: a systematic review[J]. J Investig Clin Dent, 2019, 10(4): e12449.
17 Blaschke C, Schwass DR. The socket-shield technique: a critical literature review[J]. Int J Implant Dent, 2020, 6(1): 52.
18 Sáez-Alcaide LM, González Fernández-Tresguerres F, Cortés-Bretón Brinkmann J, et al. Socket shield technique: a systematic review of human studies[J]. Ann Anat, 2021, 238: 151779.
19 Ogawa T, Sitalaksmi RM, Miyashita M, et al. Effectiveness of the socket shield technique in dental implant: a systematic review[J]. J Prosthodont Res, 2022, 66(1): 12-18.
20 Atieh MA, Shah M, Abdulkareem M, et al. The socket shield technique for immediate implant placement: a systematic review and meta-analysis[J]. J Esthet Restor Dent, 2021, 33(8): 1186-1200.
21 Velasco Bohórquez P, Rucco R, Zubizarreta-Macho Á, et al. Failure rate, marginal bone loss, and pink esthetic with socket-shield technique for immediate dental implant placement in the esthetic zone. A systematic review and meta-analysis[J]. Biology (Basel), 2021, 10(6): 549.
22 康帅, 曹均凯, 胡楠, 等. 牙科盾构技术与传统即刻种植术临床效果对比的Meta分析[J]. 武警医学, 2021, 32(6): 518-522, 526.
Kang S, Cao JK, Hu N, et al. Clinical outcomes of socket-shield technique and conventional immediate implantation: a meta analysis[J]. Med J Chin People ’ s Arm Polic Forc, 2021, 32(6): 518-522, 526.
23 Zhang AB, Liu YP, Liu XX, et al. Could the socket shield technique be better than conventional immediate implantation? A meta-analysis[J]. Clin Oral Investig, 2022, 26(2): 1173-1182.
24 Abd-Elrahman A, Shaheen M, Askar N, et al. Soc-ket shield technique vs conventional immediate implant placement with immediate temporization. Randomized clinical trial[J]. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res, 2020, 22(5): 602-611.
25 Atef M, El Barbary A, Dahrous MSE, et al. Compa-rison of the soft and hard peri-implant tissue dimensional changes around single immediate implants in the esthetic zone with socket shield technique versus using xenograft: a randomized controlled clinical trial[J]. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res, 2021, 23(3): 456-465.
26 Barakat DA, Hassan RS, Eldibany RM. Evaluation of the socket shield technique for immediate implantation[J]. Alex Dent J, 2017, 42(2): 155-161.
27 Bramanti E, Norcia A, Cicciù M, et al. Postextraction dental implant in the aesthetic zone, socket shield technique versus conventional protocol[J]. J Craniofac Surg, 2018, 29(4): 1037-1041.
28 Sun C, Zhao JX, Liu Z, et al. Comparing conventional flap-less immediate implantation and socket-shield technique for esthetic and clinical outcomes: a randomized clinical study[J]. Clin Oral Implants Res, 2020, 31(2): 181-191.
29 Fattouh H. Socket-shield technique versus guided bone regeneration technique for ridge preservation with immediate implant placement in the esthetic zone[J]. Egypt Dent J, 2018, 64(3): 2047-2055.
30 Hana SA, Omar OA. Socket shield technique for dental implants in the esthetic zone, clinical and radiographical evaluation[J]. J Duhok Univ, 2020, 23(1): 69-80.
31 Tiwari S, Bedi RS, Wadhwani P, et al. Comparison of immediate implant placement following extraction with and without socket-shield technique in esthetic region[J]. J Maxillofac Oral Surg, 2020, 19(4): 552-560. Epub 2019 Aug 17.
32 李云杉. 美学区改良盾构术与传统即刻种植术治疗上颌前牙区单颗牙种植患者的效果比较[J]. 中国民康医学, 2021, 33(8): 134-136.
Li YS. Comparison of the effect of modified socket-shield technique and conventional immediate implant for maxillary single anterior teeth in aesthetic area[J]. Med J Chin People’s Heal, 2021, 33(8): 134-136.
33 秦蓉, 员东星, 刘晶, 等. 根膜技术在上颌单前牙即刻种植修复中应用的美学效果[J]. 海军医学杂志, 2021, 42(1): 112-114.
Qin R, Yun DX, Liu J, et al. Aesthetic performance of root membrane technique in immediate implant placement of maxillary single anterior teeth[J]. J Navy Med, 2021, 42(1): 112-114.
34 张超, 袁颖. 前牙牙根屏障即刻种植术（SST）的临床和美学效果[J]. 中国现代医生, 2021, 59(7): 5-9.
Zhang C, Yuan Y. Clinical and aesthetic effects of socket-shield technique (SST) for the root barrier in anterior teeth[J]. China Modern Doc, 2021, 59(7): 5-9.
35 谭蕾, 孙聪. 应用CBCT评估“根膜种植牙”术后唇侧骨量变化[J]. 中国美容医学, 2019, 28(12): 102-106.
Tan L, Sun C. Use CBCT to contrastive analyze the impact on side dental lamina size of socket-shield[J]. Tech Chin J Aesth Med, 2019, 28(12): 102-106.
36 张宾, 孙丽华, 张俊花, 等. 上颌美学区改良盾构术与常规不翻瓣即刻种植即刻修复的短期效果比较[J]. 中国组织工程研究, 2020, 24(34): 5514-5519.
Zhang B, Sun LH, Zhang JH, et al. Short-term effect comparison of a modified socket shield technique and conventional flapless immediate implant and immediate restoration in maxillary aesthetic area[J]. Chin J Tiss Eng Res, 2020, 24(34): 5514-5519.
37 闫圣杰. 上颌前牙区应用根膜技术即刻种植的临床效果观察[D]. 济南: 山东大学, 2019.
Yan SJ. Clinical evaluation of the socket-shield technique for immediate implantation in the maxillary anterior region[D]. Jinan: Shandong University, 2019.
38 Roe P, Kan JYK, Rungcharassaeng K. Residual root preparation for socket-shield procedures: a facial window approach[J]. Int J Esthet Dent, 2017, 12(3): 324-335.
39 Calvo-Guirado JL, Troiano M, López-López PJ, et al. Different configuration of socket shield technique in peri-implant bone preservation: an experimental study in dog mandible[J]. Anat Anzeiger: Off Organ Anat Gesellschaft, 2016, 208: 109-115.
40 陈慧鸿, 韦颂观, 庞博, 等. 牙根盾技术在保存前牙区种植体周围软硬组织的研究进展[J]. 中国组织工程研究, 2018, 22(10): 1605-1610.
Chen HH, Wei SG, Pang B, et al. Socket shield technique for peri-implant tissue preservation in esthe-tics zone[J]. Chin J Tiss Eng Res, 2018, 22(10): 1605-1610.
41 Gharpure AS, Bhatavadekar NB. Current evidence on the socket-shield technique: a systematic review[J]. J Oral Implantol, 2017, 43(5): 395-403.
42 Sáez-Alcaide LM, González Fernández-Tresguerres F, Cortés-Bretón Brinkmann J, et al. Socket shield technique: a systematic review of human studies[J]. Ann Anat, 2021, 238: 151779.
43 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[J]. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res, 2018, 20(2): 122-129.
44 Calvo-Guirado JL, Troiano M, López-López PJ, et al. Different configuration of socket shield technique in peri-implant bone preservation: an experimental study in dog mandible[J]. Anat Anzeiger: Off Organ Anat Gesellschaft, 2016, 208: 109-115.
45 Tan Z, Kang J, Liu WJ, et al. 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[J]. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res, 2018, 20(3): 352-359.
46 Schwarz F, Mihatovic I, Golubovic V, et al. Dentointegration of a titanium implant: a case report[J]. Oral Maxillofac Surg, 2013, 17(3): 235-241.
47 Bäumer D, Zuhr O, Rebele S, et al. Socket shield technique for immediate implant placement-clinical, radiographic and volumetric data after 5 years[J]. Clin Oral Implants Res, 2017, 28(11): 1450-1458.
48 Botticelli D, Berglundh T, Buser D, et al. The jum-ping distance revisited: an experimental study in the dog[J]. Clin Oral Implants Res, 2003, 14(1): 35-42.
49 Dayakar M, Waheed A, Bhat H, et al. The socket-shield technique and immediate implant placement[J]. J Indian Soc Periodontol, 2018, 22(5): 451.
50 Fürhauser R, Florescu D, Benesch T, et al. Evaluation of soft tissue around single-tooth implant crow-ns: the pink esthetic score[J]. Clin Oral Implants Res, 2005, 16(6): 639-644.
51 Du Toit J, Gluckman H. The modified socket-shield technique[J]. J Craniofac Surg, 2018, 29(7): 2005-2006.
52 Han CH, Park KB, Mangano FG. The modified socket shield technique[J]. J Craniofac Surg, 2018, 29(8): 2247-2254.
[1] Gong Jiaming,Zhao Ruimin,Pan Hongwei,Lang Xin,Yu Zhanhai,Li Jianxue. Meta-analysis of dynamic navigation versus static navigation in the accuracy of implant surgery [J]. Int J Stomatol, 2023, 50(5): 538-551.
[2] revascularization Meta-analysis of the efficacy comparison between endodontic,Zhuanzhuan apexification Li. OSID） [J]. Int J Stomatol, 2023, 50(2): 177-185.
[3] Zhang Shan,Ge Xiaolei,Li Jie,Xie Xinyu,Chang Weiwei,Ma Wensheng.. Meta-analysis of the long-term effect of maxillary protraction on jaw growth and development [J]. Int J Stomatol, 2022, 49(5): 548-555.
[4] Ma Yu,Zuo Yu,Zhang Xin. Photodynamic therapy as an adjunct to periodontitis: a meta-analysis [J]. Int J Stomatol, 2022, 49(3): 305-316.
[5] Zhou Wanhang,Li Yanfei,Xu Ricong,Wan Qijun. Effects of non-surgical periodontal treatment on risk factors of chronic kidney disease and systematic inflammatory levels in patients with chronic kidney disease and periodontal disease: a Meta-analysis [J]. Int J Stomatol, 2021, 48(5): 528-535.
[6] Qin Xiaoru,Liu Mengyuan. Association between periodontal disease and myocardial infarction: a Meta-analysis of cohort studies [J]. Int J Stomatol, 2021, 48(2): 165-172.
[7] Liu Ling,Gong Renguo,Dong Xiuhua,Liu Rumeng. Meta-analysis of the long-term stability of serious anterior skeletal open-bite malocclusion after orthodontic surgery [J]. Int J Stomatol, 2021, 48(2): 173-179.
[8] Wang Shiqi,Chang Yaqin,Chen Bin,Tan Baochun,Ni Yanhong. Comparison of clinical outcomes between using bone graft alone and the combination of bone graft with membrane for periodontal regeneration therapy: a systematic review and Meta-analysis [J]. Int J Stomatol, 2020, 47(6): 644-651.
[9] Hou Yali,Ma Li. Meta-analysis of the association between interferon regulatory factor 6 gene polymorphisms and non-syndromic cleft lip with or without cleft palate in Asian population [J]. Int J Stomatol, 2020, 47(4): 397-405.
[10] Wang Jian,Zhang Xin. One case of socket shield technique for immediate implantation [J]. Int J Stomatol, 2020, 47(1): 10-16.
[11] Supriya Shakya,Zhang Xin,Wang Jian. Research progress on socket shield technique concurrent with immediate implantation [J]. Int J Stomatol, 2020, 47(1): 109-114.
[12] Gao Jie,Ma Rui,Ge Zhenlin. Effectiveness of heat-activated Ni-Ti wires for orthodontic treatment: a systematic review [J]. Int J Stomatol, 2019, 46(4): 393-399.
[13] Meijie Wang,Xin Tan,Yuwei Zhao,Haiyang Yu. Influences of immediat implant or traditional implant on postoperative pain [J]. Int J Stomatol, 2019, 46(3): 292-296.
[14] Weilin Pan,Yubin Cao,Chang Liu,Jiyuan Liu,Chunjie Li,Jian Pan,Chengge Hua. Flap design associated pain after the extraction of mandibular third molars: a systematic review and Meta-analysis [J]. Inter J Stomatol, 2019, 46(2): 142-148.
[15] Jie Huang,Yunhong Lin. Effect of keratinized mucosa width on peri-implant bone loss [J]. Inter J Stomatol, 2019, 46(2): 149-155.
Viewed
Full text


Abstract

Cited
  Shared   
  Discussed   
[1] . [J]. Foreign Med Sci: Stomatol, 1999, 26(06): .
[2] . [J]. Foreign Med Sci: Stomatol, 1999, 26(05): .
[3] . [J]. Foreign Med Sci: Stomatol, 1999, 26(05): .
[4] . [J]. Foreign Med Sci: Stomatol, 1999, 26(05): .
[5] . [J]. Foreign Med Sci: Stomatol, 1999, 26(05): .
[6] . [J]. Foreign Med Sci: Stomatol, 1999, 26(04): .
[7] . [J]. Foreign Med Sci: Stomatol, 2005, 32(06): 458 -460 .
[8] . [J]. Foreign Med Sci: Stomatol, 2005, 32(06): 452 -454 .
[9] . [J]. Inter J Stomatol, 2008, 35(S1): .
[10] . [J]. Inter J Stomatol, 2008, 35(S1): .