Socket shield technique vs conventional immediate implant placement with immediate temporization. Randomized clinical trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Alveolar bone resorption and labial bone plate reduction follow teeth extraction due to the deficiency of blood supply, derived from the loss of periodontal ligaments, and hence the socket shield technique was introduced to preserve the periodontal ligaments related perfusion. PURPOSE: The study aimed to compare the vertical and horizontal changes of the buccal cortical bone plates, encountered after utilizing the socket shield technique with immediate temporization vs an immediate implant placement with immediate temporization, and analyzing the differences of the implant stability and pink esthetic score evaluation between both techniques. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of 40 dental implants were placed in the maxillary esthetic zone, 20 implants were placed using the socket shield technique with immediate temporization; the study group and 20 implants were placed immediately with immediate temporization; the control group. All patients received immediate and 6 months postoperative CBCT to assess the dimensional changes in the labial bone plates. Implant stability quotients (ISQs) and pink esthetic scores were measured at the time of implant placement and 6 months postoperatively. RESULTS: The horizontal bone loss; ranged from 0 to0.26 (0.15) mm and 0.03 to0.44 (0.32) mm for the study and control groups, respectively. The vertical bone loss; ranged from 0.11 to 0.55 (0.31) mm and 0.25 to 1.51 (0.7) mm for the study and control groups, respectively. The ISQ for the study group increased from 68.6 ± 3.81 to 76.7 ± 3.49, while in the control group it increased from 66.4 ± 5.64 to 75 ± 4.4. PES for the study group increased from 11 to 12, while in the control group it decreased from 13 to 9. CONCLUSION: The socket shield technique with immediate temporization is a reliable method to reduce the labial bone loss following teeth extraction. However, further studies are required to investigate the effect of grafting the jumping gaps, to evaluate the graft contribution in further reduction of the bone loss.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".