A 5-year prospective clinical trial on short implants (6 mm) for single tooth replacement in the posterior maxilla: immediate versus delayed loading
- 239 Downloads
The aim of this paper was to demonstrate the treatment outcomes following immediate functional loading concept of short implants inserted for single tooth replacement in the posterior maxilla. The study was performed on 63 patients who received short (6 mm) implants for single tooth replacement in the posterior maxilla. Forty-eight patients underwent immediate functional concept, whereas 15 of the implants were loaded 3 months after insertion. The patients were evaluated for up to 5 years after prosthesis completion. The endpoints included the evaluation of implant survival rate, crown length, bone resorption, plaque accumulation (PI), bleeding on probing (BOP), periodontal probing depth (PPD) and assessment of oral health impact profile (OHIP). At the end of the follow-up period of 5 years, three implants (6.3%) from the immediate loading group have failed during the observation period. Bone loss was significantly lower in the delayed loading group compared to the immediately loaded implants. At the end of the second year, BOP values were higher in the immediately loaded group. Throughout the observation period, PI values in the group with immediate loading were higher. PPD increased consistently and during the first 3 years in the immediate loading group. As a conclusion, short implants inserted for single tooth replacement at the posterior maxilla presented with satisfactory clinical outcomes in both immediate and delayed loading concepts. However, immediately loaded implants presented with an increased bone loss and higher BOP values. As assessed by the OHIP score, a subjective improvement was observed in both groups without significant differences.
KeywordsDelayed Immediate Implant Maxilla Temporary
The authors would like to thank Mrs Eylem Ugur Gülses for conducting the statistical analysis of the manuscript.
Compliance with ethical standards
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that they have no confict of interest.
- 2.Tallarico M, Meloni SM, Xhanari E, Pisano M, Cochran DL. Minimally invasive sinus augmentation procedure using a dedicated hydraulic sinus lift implant device: a prospective case series study on clinical, radiologic, and patient-centered outcomes. Int J Periodontics Restor Dent. 2017;37(1):125–35.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 3.Gutwald R, Haberstroh J, Kuschnierz J, Kister C, Lysek DA, Maglione M, Xavier SP, Oshima T, Schmelzeisen R, Sauerbier S. Mesenchymal stem cells and inorganic bovine bone mineral in sinus augmentation: comparison with augmentation by autologous bone in adult sheep.Br. J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2010;48(4):285–90.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 9.Sogo M, Ikebe K, Yang TC, Wada M, Maeda Y. Assessment of bone density in the posterior maxilla based on Hounsfield units to enhance the initial stability of implants. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res. 2012;14(Suppl 1):e183-7.Google Scholar
- 12.World Health Organization. Oral Health Surveys, Basic Methods. 4th ed. Geneva: WHO Press; 1997. pp. 26–9 (Oral Health Assessment Form).Google Scholar
- 18.Misch CE, Perel ML, Wang HL, Sammartino G, Galindo-Moreno P, Trisi P, Steigmann M, Rebaudi A, Palti A, Pikos MA, Schwartz-Arad D, Choukroun J, Gutierrez-Perez JL, Marenzi G, Valavanis DK. Implant success, survival, and failure: the International Congress of Oral Implantologists (ICOI) Pisa Consensus Conference. Implant Dent. 2008;17:5–15.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 20.Kim SJ, Ribeiro AL, Atlas AM, Saleh N, Royal J, Radvar M, Korostoff J. Resonance frequency analysis as a predictor of early implant failure in the partially edentulous posterior maxilla following immediate nonfunctional loading or delayed loading with single unit restorations. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2015;26(2):183–90.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 21.Abboud M, Koeck B, Stark H, Wahl G, Paillon R. Immediate loading of single-tooth implants in the posterior region. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2005;20(1):61–8Google Scholar
- 22.Esposito M, Ardebili Y, Worthington HV. Interventions for replacing missing teeth: different types of dental implants. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2014;22:CD003815.Google Scholar
- 25.Boni W, Delle Donne U, Corradini G, Tettamanti L, Tagliabue A. Short versus standard length implants: a case series analysis. J Biol Regul Homeost Agents. 2015;29(3 Suppl 1):1–5.Google Scholar
- 30.Moy PK, Nishimura GH, Pozzi A, Danda AK. Single implants in dorsal areas—a systematic review. Eur J Oral Implantol. 2016;9(Suppl 1):163-72.Google Scholar
- 38.Blanes RJ, Bernard JP, Blanes ZM, Belser UC. A 10-year prospective study of ITI dental implants placed in the posterior region. II: influence of the crown-to-implant ratio and different prosthetic treatment modalities on crestal bone loss. Clin Oral Implant Res. 2007;18:707–14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 42.Raes S, Raes F, Cooper L, Giner Tarrida L, Vervaeke S, Cosyn J, De Bruyn H. Oral health-related quality of life changes after placement of immediately loaded single implants in healed alveolar ridges or extraction sockets: a 5-year prospective follow-up study. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2016. https://doi.org/10.1111/clr.12858.Google Scholar