AIM: Primary and secondary stabilities of immediately loaded mandibular implants restored with fixed prostheses (FP) using rigid or semi-rigid splinting systems were clinically and radiographically evaluated. METHODS:Fifteen edentulous patients were rehabilitated using hybrid FP; each had 5 implants placed between the mental foramens. Two groups were randomly divided: group 1-FP with the conventional rigid bar splinting the implants and group 2-semi-rigid cantilever extension system with titanium bars placed in the 2 distal abutment cylinders. Primary stability was evaluated using resonance frequency analysis after installation of the implant abutments. The measurements were made at 3 times: T0, at baseline; T1, 4 months after implant placement; and T2, 8 months after implant placement. Presence of mobility and inflammation in the implant surrounding regions were checked. Stability data were submitted to statistical analysis for comparison between groups (P < 0.05). RESULTS:Implant survival rate for the implants was of 100% in both groups. No significant differences in the mean implant stability quotient values were found for both groups from baseline and after the 8-month follow-up. CONCLUSION: The immediate loading of the implants was satisfactory, and both splinting conditions (rigid and semi-rigid) can be successfully used for the restoration of edentulous mandibles.
RCT Entities:
AIM: Primary and secondary stabilities of immediately loaded mandibular implants restored with fixed prostheses (FP) using rigid or semi-rigid splinting systems were clinically and radiographically evaluated. METHODS: Fifteen edentulous patients were rehabilitated using hybrid FP; each had 5 implants placed between the mental foramens. Two groups were randomly divided: group 1-FP with the conventional rigid bar splinting the implants and group 2-semi-rigid cantilever extension system with titanium bars placed in the 2 distal abutment cylinders. Primary stability was evaluated using resonance frequency analysis after installation of the implant abutments. The measurements were made at 3 times: T0, at baseline; T1, 4 months after implant placement; and T2, 8 months after implant placement. Presence of mobility and inflammation in the implant surrounding regions were checked. Stability data were submitted to statistical analysis for comparison between groups (P < 0.05). RESULTS: Implant survival rate for the implants was of 100% in both groups. No significant differences in the mean implant stability quotient values were found for both groups from baseline and after the 8-month follow-up. CONCLUSION: The immediate loading of the implants was satisfactory, and both splinting conditions (rigid and semi-rigid) can be successfully used for the restoration of edentulous mandibles.