Related Experiment Video
Updated: Feb 26, 2026
Real-Time Dynamic Navigation System for the Precise Quad-Zygomatic Implant Placement in a Patient with a Severely Atrophic Maxilla
Published on: October 18, 2021
Prevalence of Buccal Ridge Concavities Following Implant Placement With Contour Bone Augmentation: A Cross-Sectional
Sophia E Vollath1, Giorgina M Wiedmer1, Clemens Raabe1,2
1Department of Oral Surgery and Stomatology, University of Bern School of Dental Medicine, Bern, Switzerland.
Objectives:
To evaluate the long-term prevalence of buccal ridge concavity (BRC) following implant placement with simultaneous contour bone augmentation (CBA).
Methods:
Adult patients with at least one single-tooth non-molar implant-supported prosthesis and no diagnosis of peri-implantitis were included in this exploratory cross-sectional study. Clinical, digital, and patient-reported outcomes measures (PROMs) were collected. Intra-oral scans were analyzed at multiple apico-coronal levels with dedicated software to assess the presence of BRC.
Results:
A total of 186 patients (211 implants) were analyzed over a mean follow-up of 11.4 ± 1.4 years. BRC was observed in 100% of sites and patients, with a mean value of -0.83 ± 0.45 mm at the mucosal margin, -0.62 ± 0.39 mm at 3 mm apical, and -0.47 ± 0.32 mm at 5 mm apical. Multivariate analysis at 3 mm apical showed greater BRC in males (+0.165 mm, p = 0.003), premolar sites (+0.110 mm, p = 0.03), and when implants ≥ 12 mm were placed (+0.141 mm, p = 0.008). The greater the keratinized mucosa, the smaller the BRC, and the greater the crestal bone loss, the higher the BRC. PROMs indicated high satisfaction with esthetics, function, treatment expectations, tolerability of the overall procedure, and oral hygiene; OHIP-14 scores were low (2 ± 4).
Conclusions:
Implant placement with CBA does not fully restore alveolar ridge volume in non-molar sites, with all cases showing BRC, particularly at the most coronal aspect. However, patient-reported satisfaction remained high.
