# Virtual and clinical implant placement after ridge preservation in periodontally compromised molars: retrospective study

## TL;DR

This study shows that placing dental implants in molars with periodontal issues is often possible without major bone augmentation, with location and bone defects being key factors.

## Contribution

The study provides new insights into the feasibility of implant placement after ridge preservation in compromised molars using virtual and clinical assessments.

## Key findings

- Only 6.81% of sites required staged augmentation for 4.1 × 8 mm and 4.8 × 8 mm implants in virtual planning.
- 76.1% of clinically treated sites received simple implant placement, with location and bone defects being major influencing factors.
- Virtual planning showed 59.16% and 45.55% of sites were suitable for simple implant placement for different implant sizes.

## Abstract

The purpose of this study is to assess the possibility and needs for bone augmentation in virtual planning and clinical treatment of prosthetically guided dental implants (PGI) following alveolar ridge preservation (ARP) in periodontally compromised molar extraction sites and to analyze the influencing factors.

One hundred forty three subjects with 191 molars were included. Radiographic data assessed baseline ridge height and width in variable sites. Virtual implant planning with 4.1/4.8 mm diameter, 8/10 mm length implants was performed using CBCT. The feasibility of simple implant placement and the need for augmentation during implant therapy were assessed. According to the medical records, the implant therapy modalities for sites that received dental implant treatment were also counted.

Results of virtual implant planning showed that a few sites (6.81%) required staged augmentation for 4.1 × 8 mm and 4.8 × 8 mm implants, while 59.16% and 45.55% of the sites were possible for simple implant placement, respectively. For all cases clinically treated with implant therapy, 76.1% received simple implant placement, and 3.15% received staged augmentation. Implant treatment modalities were most influenced by location (maxillary/mandible) and the baseline buccal and lingual/palatal bone defects.

PGI placement is possible in periodontally compromised molars following ARP, and only a few sites require complicated augmentation procedures. Location and baseline buccal and lingual/palatal bone defects are the influencing factors for implant treatment planning.

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12903-026-07921-7.