Browsing by Author "Shweta Ahlawat"

Now showing 1 - 2 of 2

Comparative evaluation of conventional and socket-shield techniques on maxillary esthetics following immediate implant placement in fresh extraction sockets: A randomized controlled trial
(Wolters Kluwer Medknow Publications, 2024) Farhan Durrani; Aishwarya Pandey; Shweta Ahlawat; Ekta Kumari; S. U. Gokila Vani; Sakshi Agarwal; P. G. Naveen Kumar
Background: Dental implants in fresh extraction sockets of the maxillary esthetic area are technique-sensitive procedures where retaining a buccal root segment can enhance periodontium preservation and esthetics. This study aims to compare marginal bone levels and esthetic outcomes between conventional immediate implant placement and the socket-shield technique in fresh maxillary extraction sockets. Materials and Methods: Twenty-four patients with type 1 extraction sockets were included in this randomized trial and assigned to either conventional immediate implant placement or the socket-shield technique. Implant survival, crestal bone levels, and pink esthetic scores (PES) were evaluated at 8 months (temporary prosthesis), 12 months, and 36 months (final crowns). Results: All implant-supported restorations were successful within the study's observation period. The socket-shield technique showed significantly lower marginal bone loss (e.g. 1.40 ± 0.29 mm vs. 1.70 ± 0.36 mm at 36 months; P = 0.040) and superior PES (e.g., 10.50 ± 0.90 vs. 9.36 ± 0.98 at 36 months; P = 0.008) compared to the conventional technique. However, the technique's complexity underscores the need for expertise and careful execution to optimize tissue preservation in the maxillary esthetic zone. Conclusion: The socket-shield technique better preserves hard and soft tissues around implant-retained prostheses than conventional implant placement in maxillary esthetic regions. Further studies with larger sample sizes and longer follow-up are required to validate these findings. © 2025 Indian Society of Periodontology.
Comparative evaluation of hard and soft tissue parameters by using short implants and standard long implants with sinus lift for prosthetic rehabilitation of posterior maxilla
(Wolters Kluwer Medknow Publications, 2024) Farhan Durrani; S.M. Karthickraj; Fouzia Imran; Shweta Ahlawat; Ekta Kumari; S. U. Gokila Vani
Objective: The objective is to compare and evaluate the hard and soft tissue parameters by using short and standard long implants with sinus lifting in the posterior maxilla. Materials and Methods: Eleven patients with complaints of missing upper back teeth were enrolled in the study for implant-supported rehabilitation and were categorized into two groups: Group long (GL): longer implant (>8 mm) placement, preceded by Sinus Augmentation. Group short (GS): short implant (≤8 mm) placement, without sinus augmentation. The primary outcome measured was cumulative survival rate (CSR) in the compromised partial edentulous posterior maxilla. Secondary outcomes measured were implant stability (IS), marginal bone level alterations (MBL), pocket probing depth (PPD), crown-to-implant ratio, and any complications. Results: The difference in CSR between the groups was not statistically significant (P = 0.317). High stability was achieved immediately after the placement of the implants, in both groups (GS: 64 ± 4.07, GL: 65.58 ± 9.75); this difference in the mean ISQ (IS quotients) values was not found to be statistically significant at implant placement (P = 0.7). The mean MBL reported in the study at the end of 12 months of prosthesis function was - 0.762 ± 0.48 mm and - 0.7 ± 0.34 mm for GS and GL, respectively. The mean PPD measurements in GS and GL groups were 1.917 ± 0.68 mm and 1.833 ± 0.38 mm, respectively, and it was not statistically significant (P = 0.8). Conclusion: Within the limitations of the present study, the obtained results indicate that short implants provided a similar clinical and radiographic performance compared to long implants placed in combination with a sinus augmentation procedure (lateral window) up to 12 months after prosthetic loading. © 2024 Indian Society of Periodontology | Published by Wolters Kluwer - Medknow.