PubMed · 2011 · 11 citations · 25 references
DentistryImplant DentistryOrthodonticsProstheticsBridge RehabilitationMandibular Advancement TherapyMandibular ReconstructionCohort Study InvestigationEarly Implant PlacementImplant Supported Bridge DesignImplant-supported Full-mouth RehabilitationImplant-supported RehabilitationMandibular Full-arch RehabilitationSurgical Implant Placement
PURPOSE: To evaluate the outcome of immediately loaded cross-arch bridges 4 months after loading. A second aim was to compare survival rates of implants placed in healed versus fresh extraction sites. MATERIALS AND METHODS: In total, 105 consecutive patients about to have their mandibles rendered fully edentulous (mean extractions per patient: 6.1 teeth) received four to six implants each (total number = 448), which were immediately placed in healed sites (266 implants, 59%) or fresh sockets (182 implants: 41%). Immediate loading of provisional prostheses was performed and all patients were followed-up for 4 months. The success criteria included prosthesis success, assessment of individual implant stability and complications. RESULTS: No patient dropped out and all 105 patients received definitive fixed prostheses after four months of loading. The overall implant survival rate after four months was 98.2%. Eight implants were lost in eight patients (8%). Four of them were inserted in fresh extraction sockets (2.2%) and four in healed sites (1.5%). No significant difference (P = 0.4990) was found for implants placed into healed sites versus fresh extraction sites. No complications were reported. CONCLUSIONS: Immediate implant placement and loading resulted in high implant as well as prosthetic survival rates. Placement in healed or fresh extraction bone sites did not influence implant survival.
25
Paulo Maló, Bo Rangert, Miguel de Araújo Nobre · Clinical Implant Dentistry and Related Research · 2003 · 763 citations