Clinical Advances in Periodontics· 2026Q2
Orthodontic, regenerative, and implant management of a mandibular anterior defect: 5‐year outcome
- 0citations
- Q2SCImago
- 2026year
Short summary
A 5-year follow-up shows stable hard and soft tissue outcomes in a patient with a severe mandibular anterior defect treated with orthodontic space creation, simultaneous guided bone regeneration (GBR) for implants, and guided tissue regeneration (GTR) for adjacent teeth.
AI-generated from the title and abstract; the full text is not read.
Key points
- Orthodontic space creation was crucial for implant placement in a mandibular anterior defect with mesiodistal space limitations.
- Simultaneous guided bone regeneration (GBR) and guided tissue regeneration (GTR) successfully reconstructed combined implant and natural tooth defects.
- A single surgical intervention for GBR/GTR and implant placement reduced patient procedures.
- Stable hard and soft tissue conditions, along with favorable functional and esthetic outcomes, were maintained for 5 years post-treatment.
AI-generated from the title and abstract; the full text is not read.
Abstract
Abstract Background Severe alveolar ridge defects in the mandibular anterior region, often associated with congenital tooth absence and subsequent loss of retained primary teeth, present significant challenges for implant rehabilitation. Limited space, horizontal ridge deficiency, and complex site anatomy often require a multidisciplinary approach to achieve stable hard‐ and soft‐tissue outcomes. Methods A 30‐year‐old woman presented with absence of teeth #23 and #25, distal rotation of tooth #24, and insufficient mesiodistal space for implant placement. After 15 months of orthodontic space creation, severe horizontal ridge deficiency was confirmed clinically and by cone‐beam computed tomography (CBCT). A single‐stage surgical protocol was performed consisting of implant placement with guided bone regeneration (GBR) at sites #23 and #25 and guided tissue regeneration (GTR) at adjacent teeth #24 and #26. Deproteinized bovine bone mineral and an absorbable collagen membrane were used for defect regeneration, followed by tension‐free primary closure. Results Healing was uneventful. At the 5‐year follow‐up, clinical and radiographic evaluation demonstrated stable buccolingual ridge dimensions, adequate keratinized mucosa, and healthy peri‐implant soft‐tissue contours. CBCT confirmed maintenance of regenerated bone at the implant sites and adjacent natural teeth, with no evidence of mucosal or gingival recession and preserved bone volume. Conclusion This case illustrates that a coordinated approach involving orthodontic space creation followed by implant placement with simultaneous GBR and GTR may support long‐term rehabilitation of mandibular anterior defects. Stable hard‐ and soft‐tissue conditions and favorable functional and esthetic outcomes were maintained over a 5‐year follow‐up. The simultaneous use of GBR and GTR at adjacent implant and natural‐tooth sites, documented over 5 years, distinguishes this case from conventional staged approaches. Key points Orthodontic space creation is often essential for prosthetically driven implant placement in mandibular anterior mesiodistal defects. Simultaneous guided bone regeneration and guided tissue regeneration can allow reconstruction of combined implant‐ and tooth‐related defects. Performing regenerative procedures and implant placement during a single surgical intervention reduces the number of surgeries for the patient. Plain language summary Missing teeth in the front lower jaw can be challenging to replace when there is not enough bone to support implants and when nearby natural teeth have developed supporting tissue problems related to orthodontic treatment. This case report describes the treatment of a patient with missing teeth who first received orthodontic treatment to create enough space for implants. The patient then received dental implants along with procedures to rebuild bone around the implants and regenerate the supporting tissues around nearby natural teeth. Both procedures were performed during the same surgery, and the patient was followed for 5 years. The results showed that the bone and gum tissues around both the implants and natural teeth remained stable, with good function and appearance. This combined treatment approach may be a possible option for carefully selected patients with complex conditions. However, because this report describes only one patient, further studies involving more patients are needed to confirm these findings.
The authors' abstract, as published at the source. Clinical Advances in Periodontics, 2026 · DOI ↗
Continue with a free account
Ask the paper: 3 free questions a day about this paper; save it, get its citation, new summaries every day for your field. Takeaways are Premium.
Continue free on the webSign in with Google or Apple; no card needed. You come back to this paper.
On your phone:
Field: Oral Surgery
Oral SurgeryDentistry