OBJECTIVES The aim of this systematic review and meta-analyses was to evaluate the outcomes of alveolar ridge preservation (ARP) following extraction of non-molar teeth in comparison to early implant placement (EIP) in terms of clinical and radiographic changes, need for additional augmentation at the time of implant placement, patient-reported outcomes, and implant failure rate. METHODS Electronic databases were searched to identify randomized and non-randomized studies that compared ARP to EIP. The risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane Collaboration's Risk of Bias tool. Data were analyzed using a statistical software program. RESULTS A total of 106 studies were identified, of which five studies with 198 non-molar extraction sockets in 198 participants were included. Overall meta-analysis showed significant differences in changes in midfacial mucosal margin (mean difference (MD) -0.09; 95% confidence interval (CI) -0.17 to -0.01; p = .03) and ridge width (MD -1.70; 95% CI -3.19 to -0.20; p = .03) in favor of ARP. The use of ARP was also associated with less need for additional augmentation at implant placement, but the difference was not statistically significant. CONCLUSIONS Within the limitation of this review, ARP following extraction of non-molar teeth has short-term positive effects on soft tissue contour, mucosal margin and thickness, and alveolar ridge width and height. It can also simplify future implant treatment by minimizing the need for additional augmentation.

中文翻译：

---

单个非磨牙部位的牙槽嵴保留与早期种植体植入：系统评价和荟萃分析。


目的 本系统评价和荟萃分析的目的是评估拔除非磨牙后牙槽嵴保留 （ARP） 的结果，与早期种植体植入 （EIP） 相比，包括临床和影像学变化、种植体植入时需要额外增强、患者报告的结果和种植体失败率。方法 检索电子数据库以确定将 ARP 与 EIP 进行比较的随机和非随机研究。使用 Cochrane 协作网的偏倚风险工具评估偏倚风险。使用统计软件程序分析数据。结果 共纳入 106 项研究，其中 5 项研究涉及 198 名参与者的 198 个非磨牙牙槽。总体荟萃分析显示，面中粘膜边缘 （平均差 （MD） -0.09;95% 置信区间 （CI） -0.17 至 -0.01;p = .03）和牙槽嵴宽度 （MD -1.70;95% CI -3.19 至 -0.20;p = .03） 的变化存在显著差异，有利于 ARP。使用 ARP 也与种植体植入时对额外增强的需求较少有关，但差异无统计学意义。结论 在本综述的限制范围内，拔除非磨牙后 ARP 对软组织轮廓、粘膜边缘和厚度以及牙槽嵴宽度和高度有短期积极影响。它还可以通过最大限度地减少对额外增强的需求来简化未来的种植体治疗。