PURPOSE: To evaluate the outcome and special characteristics of immediate implant rehabilitation using the All-on-Four treatment concept in completely or potentially completely edentulous Chinese patients. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A convenience sample consisted of 69 consecutive patients (37 men, 32 women; mean age: 56.7 years) treated with immediate implant placement and full-arch prosthodontic provisional prostheses between April 2008 and December 2011. Of 344 implants (192 mandibular, 152 maxillary), 240 implants were placed in fresh extraction sites. The remaining 104 implants were placed in healed sites. Implants were immediately loaded with a fixed full-arch provisional prosthesis. Implant survival rate, marginal bone loss, abutment selection, complications, and subjective patient responses were recorded during follow-up. RESULTS: Implant survival rate was 96.2% at 33.7 months of mean follow-up (range: 12 to 56 months). A statistically significantly higher implant survival rate was found in the mandible (99.0% vs 92.8%) (P < .05). No significant difference existed between survival rates for implants placed in postextraction sites and healed sites (P > .05). Peri-implant marginal bone loss around upright implants and tilted implants was 0.7 ± 0.2 mm and 0.8 ± 0.4 mm, respectively. All patients reported satisfactory treatment outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: The modified All-on-Four treatment concept provides predictably favorable outcomes in completely or potentially completely edentulous patients and is well suited to the sociodemographic needs of Chinese patients. Exploratory use of a surgical guide was limited because of mouth opening, and more angulated abutments were needed in anterior upright implants of the maxilla.
PURPOSE: To evaluate the outcome and special characteristics of immediate implant rehabilitation using the All-on-Four treatment concept in completely or potentially completely edentulous Chinese patients. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A convenience sample consisted of 69 consecutive patients (37 men, 32 women; mean age: 56.7 years) treated with immediate implant placement and full-arch prosthodontic provisional prostheses between April 2008 and December 2011. Of 344 implants (192 mandibular, 152 maxillary), 240 implants were placed in fresh extraction sites. The remaining 104 implants were placed in healed sites. Implants were immediately loaded with a fixed full-arch provisional prosthesis. Implant survival rate, marginal bone loss, abutment selection, complications, and subjective patient responses were recorded during follow-up. RESULTS: Implant survival rate was 96.2% at 33.7 months of mean follow-up (range: 12 to 56 months). A statistically significantly higher implant survival rate was found in the mandible (99.0% vs 92.8%) (P < .05). No significant difference existed between survival rates for implants placed in postextraction sites and healed sites (P > .05). Peri-implant marginal bone loss around upright implants and tilted implants was 0.7 ± 0.2 mm and 0.8 ± 0.4 mm, respectively. All patients reported satisfactory treatment outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: The modified All-on-Four treatment concept provides predictably favorable outcomes in completely or potentially completely edentulouspatients and is well suited to the sociodemographic needs of Chinese patients. Exploratory use of a surgical guide was limited because of mouth opening, and more angulated abutments were needed in anterior upright implants of the maxilla.