Early versus conventional loading for fully guided immediate implant placement in molar sites: a randomized controlled clinical study

Résumé

PURPOSE: To evaluate early versus conventional loading in immediate implants for molars. This study aims to answer the following PICO (Patient, Intervention, Comparison, and Outcome) question: In patients over 18 years of age, does early loading of immediately placed implants in molar areas result in a similar implant survival rate and marginal bone loss as conventional loading? METHODS: Twenty-seven patients (15 women and 12 men) received a total of 30 implants immediately after molar extraction. The surgical treatment protocol entailed atraumatic tooth extraction without flap elevation. Non-invasive quantitative analyses were used to assess implant stability. After an uneventful healing period, the 30 implants were restored with screw-retained monolithic zirconia prosthesis, half of which after 6 weeks (G1) and the other half after 3 months (G2). RESULTS: Regarding the survival rate, the Kaplan-Meier and log-rank test showed that there was no statistically significant difference between both groups (p = 1). Implant stability quotient at the prosthetic phase of both groups (6 weeks in G1 and 3 months in G2) revealed no statistically significant difference (G1 RFA74.4 (SD 5.54) - DCA 79.07 (SD 5.75))/G2 RFA 73.67 (SD 5.7), - DCA78.93 (SD 4.48). CONCLUSIONS: Early loading of immediately placed implants in molar sites is considered a predictable treatment modality provided that ideal implant position and adequate insertion torque are achieved.

Citer ce document

Accès au document

Texte intégral en lecture en ligne, réservé aux abonnés SPHAERO et aux membres de l'institution. Se connecter

Auteur(s)

Statistiques

Consultations : 1

Téléchargements : 0