Dataset Information

Does immediate loading of a single implant in the healed anterior maxillary ridge improve the aesthetic outcome compared to conventional loading?

ABSTRACT:

Background

Immediate loading is an attractive option for avoiding secondary surgery. However, it is unclear whether it provides a better aesthetic outcome compared to conventional loading with implants placed in healed ridges.

Aims

To compare the aesthetic outcomes of immediately and conventionally loaded single implants in healed anterior maxillary ridges.

Methodology

A systematic review using PICO was conducted. EMBASE, MEDLINE and DoSS databases were searched. The Cochrane Risk of Bias tool for Randomised Controlled Trials and the Effective Public Health Practice Project tool for other study designs were used for quality appraisal. A narrative synthesis was undertaken.

Results

A total of 622 articles were identified. After screening, a total of five papers were included. Results indicated no statistically significant difference in pink or white aesthetic scores between the immediate and conventional loading groups at 1- and 5-year review and the Papilla Index at the 1-year review.

Conclusion

Within the limitations of this review, immediate loading of single implants provides a comparable aesthetic outcome to conventional loading in healed ridges of the anterior maxillary.

SUBMITTER: Baireddy RJ

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8360987 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:Aim:To compare implant survival rate and marginal bone loss (MBL) of immediately loaded single implants inserted by using ultrasonic implant site preparation (UISP) (test) and conventional rotary instrumentation (control). Methods:Two single implants were inserted for each patient: after randomization, test site was prepared by using an ultrasonic device (Piezosurgery Touch, Mectron, Italy) and control site was prepared by using the drills of the selected implant system (Premium AZT, Sweden & Martina, Italy), until reaching a final diameter of 3?mm in both groups. Identical implants (3.8x11.5?mm) were inserted in all sites at crestal level. Impressions were taken and screwed resin single crowns with platform-switched provisional abutments were delivered with 48 hours. Periapical radiographs were taken at provisional crown insertion (T0), 6 months (T1) and one year (T2) after prosthetic loading to measure MBL. All data were tested for normality and subsequently analyzed by paired samples t-test and forward multiple linear regression. Results:Forty-eight patients were treated in six centers with the insertion of ninety-six implants (48 test; 48 control). Four implants in four patients failed within the first six months of healing (two in test group; two in control group; no difference between groups). Forty patients (age 60.1±10.7 years; 22 female, 18 male) were included in the final analysis. Mean MBL after six months of loading was 1.39±1.03?mm in the test group and 1.42±1.16?mm in the control group (p>0.05) and after one year was 1.92±1.14?mm and 2.14±1.55?mm in test and control, respectively (p>0.05). Conclusions:No differences in survival rate and MBL were demonstrated between UISP and conventional site preparation with rotary instruments in immediately loaded dental implants: UISP, with its characteristics of enhanced surgical control and safety in proximity of delicate structures, may be used as a reliable alternative to the traditional drilling systems.

Project description:ObjectivesTo evaluate clinical, radiological performance of novel digital workflow integrating dynamic navigation to streamline in one-visit single-implant immediate loading in aesthetic zone.Material and methodsConsecutive patients requiring one single-implant in aesthetic zone of both jaws were treated between May and September 2017. Primary outcomes were implant and prosthetic success rates, surgical and prosthetic complications, marginal bone loss (MBL), final pink aesthetic score (PES-f), and implant stability quotient (ISQ-f). Secondary outcomes were ISQ-0 and PES-0 at implant positioning and PES-p at definitive prosthesis placement. Potential effect of jaw (maxilla vs mandible), biotype (thin vs thick), type of incision (flap vs flapless), and implant site (healed vs. post-extractive) on the primary outcomes (MBL, PES-f, and ISQ-f) was evaluated through a multivariable analysis.ResultsFifty-two implants were placed (follow-up 18.6, 15-20 months). One post-extractive implant failed. No other surgical, biological complications occurred, accounting for 98.10% cumulative success rate (CSR). No definitive prostheses failed. Mean MBL was -0.63 ± 0.25 mm (-1.69 to -0.06). PES-f was 12.34 ± 1.41 (9-14). ISQ-f was 78.1 ± 3.2 (70-84). Age had significantly negative effect on MBL and PES-f (p = .0058 and p = .0052). No other variables significantly affected primary outcomes.ConclusionsWithin study limitations, investigated digital workflow integrating dynamic navigation was reliable for single-implant immediate loading in aesthetic zone in one visit. No statistically significant difference was found for MBL, PES-f, and ISQ-f, considering type of incision (flap vs. flapless), implant site (healed vs post-extractive), jaw (maxilla vs. mandible), and biotype (thick vs. thin). Live-tracked dynamic navigation may have contributed to improve operator clinical performance regardless of implant site characteristics. Further investigations are needed to confirm positive outcomes.

Project description:To appraise the feasibility of loading four implants with a pre-existing denture converted to a fixed dental prosthesis (FDP) on the day of implant surgery compared with waiting for 3- to 4-month healing.Patients with an edentulous, fully healed mandible were recruited in a faculty clinic to partake in a blinded two-arm parallel randomized controlled trial (RCT). The participants received four parallel intraforamina mandibular implants with a moderately rough titanium surface (Brånemark System Mk III or Mk IV TiUnite; Nobel Biocare AB, Göteborg, Sweden). The implants were loaded on the same day by converting the participants' pre-existing denture in the experimental group. The implants were placed using a one-stage surgery procedure, and the participants' pre-existing denture were soft-relined in the control group. For both groups, the permanent 10- to 12-unit FDP consisting of a type-3 cast precious alloy veneered with acrylic and artificial teeth was placed 3-4 months after implant surgery. All participants have been recalled annually for 5 years for appraisal of bone loss and registration of adverse events.Thirty-five of the original 42 participants (83%) returned for clinical and radiological examinations at the 5-year follow-up recall. No selective dropout or specific reasons for dropout was identified in the two study arms; leaving n = 17 (Intention-to-treat group, ITT) in the experimental group, alternatively n = 13 as per protocol group (PP), and n = 18 participants in the control group (ITT = PP). At study commencement, five of the participants assigned to the experimental group did not receive their planned intervention. In the control group, one implant failed to osseointegrate and another failed due to bone loss after 5 years. The crestal bone level changes over 5 years were identical in the experimental and control groups, that is, 1.2 mm (SD = 0.7). There were no differences between the two study arms with regard to incidence of biological and technical adverse events.Implants in the anterior mandible loaded immediately with a converted pre-existing denture appear to yield analogous clinical outcomes compared with waiting for 3-4 months over the first 5 years following implant surgery.