Immediate implant placement with or without connective tissue graft: A systematic review and meta‐analysis

Abstract Objectives To assess the effect of connective tissue graft (CTG) in terms of vertical mid‐facial soft tissue change when applied at the buccal aspect following single immediate implant placement (IIP). Materials and methods Two independent reviewers conducted an electronic literature search in PubMed, Web of Science, EMBASE and Cochrane databases as well as a manual search to identify eligible clinical studies up to January 2020. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and non‐randomized controlled studies (NRSs) comparing IIP with CTG and without CTG over a mean follow‐up of at least 12 months were included for a qualitative analysis. Meta‐analyses were performed on data provided by RCTs. Results Out of 1814 records, 5 RCTs and 3 NRSs reported on 409 (IIP + CTG: 246, IIP: 163) immediately installed implants with a mean follow‐up ranging from 12 to 108 months. Only 1 RCT showed low risk of bias. Meta‐analysis revealed a significant difference in terms of vertical mid‐facial soft tissue change between IIP + CTG and IIP pointing to 0.41 mm (95% CI [0.21; 0.61], p < .001) in favour of soft tissue grafting. This outcome was clinically relevant since the risk for ≥1 mm asymmetry in mid‐facial vertical soft tissue level was 12 times (RR 12.10, 95% CI [2.57; 56.91], p = .002) lower following IIP + CTG. Soft tissue grafting also resulted in a trend towards less bleeding on probing (MD 17%, 95% CI [−35%; 1%], p = .06). Meta‐analyses did not reveal significant differences in terms of pink aesthetic score, marginal bone level change and probing depth. Results were inconclusive for horizontal mid‐facial soft tissue change and papilla height change. Based on GRADE guidelines, a moderate recommendation for the use of a CTG following IIP can be made. Conclusion CTG contributes to mid‐facial soft tissue stability following IIP. Therefore, CTG should be considered when elevated risk for mid‐facial recession is expected in the aesthetic zone (thin gingival biotype, <0.5 mm buccal bone thickness).