الفهرس 
ACKNOWLEDGMENTSOnly 14 pages are availabe for public view
 |  | from | 66 |  |  |
| | | from | 66 | | |
Abstract
After tooth extraction, physiological events such as loss of the periodontal ligament and the resorption of the co-dependent bundle bone occur. These events may lead to morphological and structural changes that may result in reduction of the volume of surrounding soft and hard tissues.(4) Therefore, successful treatment with implant-supported reconstructions in the esthetic zone remains one of the biggest challenges in prosthodontics. Nowadays, different clinical approaches have been proposed with the purpose of minimizing these consequences, and there has been a growing demand for less invasive procedures that allow a favorable prognosis with more aesthetic and functional implant-supported prostheses. Minimally invasive tooth extraction, without flap release, followed by immediate implant placement, and provisional restoration has been considered an appropriate treatment for maintaining the alveolar bone and the architecture of the soft tissues (emergence profile), as well as avoiding the second-stage surgery.(5,6) To apply this approach, good primary stability is necessary. Sometimes these requirements are not met making immediate loading of the implant inadvisable; so that a more conservative approach, such as delayed loading is necessary.(7,8)