Literature DB >> 28571258

Immediate Versus Delayed Loading of Implant for Replacement of Missing Mandibular First Molar: A Randomized Prospective Six Years Clinical Study.

Prudhvi Raj Lakshmi Venkata Chidagam1, Vijaya Chandra Gande2, Sravanthi Yadlapalli3, Ramani Yarlagadda Venkata3, Sudheer Kondaka4, Sravya Chedalawada5.   

Abstract

INTRODUCTION: Emergence of dental implants made the replacement of missing tooth easy. During the early days of introduction, implants were loaded three to six months after implant insertion, but understanding of healing cascade and improved production technology has changed the phase of restoration from delayed to immediate loading. AIM: To evaluate and compare the clinical outcome of immediate and delayed loaded implant supported prosthesis for missing mandibular first molar. The objectives were bleeding on probing, probing depth, implant mobility, marginal bone level and peri-implant radiolucency were evaluated during follow up period.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: Twenty patients were included in this study who were in the need of fixed implant supported prosthesis for missing mandibular first molar. Single tooth implant with immediate loading done within two days of implant insertion in one group and another group were loaded after three months of implant insertion. These groups were evaluated clinically and radiographically over a period of 72 months after loading using Wilcoxon matched pairs test and Mann-Whitney U test.
RESULTS: The study consists of 14 male and six female patients with the age range of 19 to 31 years. There was no bleeding on probing and probing depth remained well within the normal range even after 72 months of loading among both the groups. Minimal marginal bone loss observed with no mobility and peri-implant radiolucency.
CONCLUSION: Implant supported prosthesis for missing mandibular first molar with immediate loading can be used as a successful treatment modality. It reduces treatment time, provides early function and prevents undue migration of adjacent tooth. Immediate loading showed similar clinical and radiographic results as that of delayed loading, indicating it as an equally efficient technique for implant supported prosthesis.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Bridge; Crown; Missing tooth; Prosthesis

Year:  2017        PMID: 28571258      PMCID: PMC5449914          DOI: 10.7860/JCDR/2017/26362.9663

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Clin Diagn Res        ISSN: 0973-709X


  13 in total

1.  Immediate functional loading of Brånemark dental implants. An 18-month clinical follow-up study.

Authors:  K Randow; I Ericsson; K Nilner; A Petersson; P O Glantz
Journal:  Clin Oral Implants Res       Date:  1999-02       Impact factor: 5.977

2.  Two-part implants inserted in a one-stage or a two-stage procedure. A prospective comparative study.

Authors:  Kees Heydenrijk; Gerry M Raghoebar; Henny J A Meijer; Willy A Van Der Reijden; Arie-Jan Van Winkelhoff; Boudewijn Stegenga
Journal:  J Clin Periodontol       Date:  2002-10       Impact factor: 8.728

Review 3.  Clinical parameters of evaluation during implant maintenance.

Authors:  G R Bauman; M Mills; J W Rapley; W H Hallmon
Journal:  Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants       Date:  1992       Impact factor: 2.804

4.  Early loading (2 or 6 weeks) of sandblasted and acid-etched (SLA) ITI implants in the posterior mandible. A 1-year randomized controlled clinical trial.

Authors:  Giovanni E Salvi; Guido Gallini; Niklaus P Lang
Journal:  Clin Oral Implants Res       Date:  2004-04       Impact factor: 5.977

5.  3-year followup study of early single implant restorations ad modum Brånemark.

Authors:  T Jemt; U Lekholm; K Gröndahl
Journal:  Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent       Date:  1990       Impact factor: 1.840

6.  Replacement of mandibular molars with single-unit restorations supported by wide-body implants: immediate versus delayed loading. A randomized controlled study.

Authors:  Gian Pietro Schincaglia; Riccardo Marzola; Giovanni Fazi Giovanni; Chiara Scapoli Chiara; Roberto Scotti
Journal:  Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants       Date:  2008 May-Jun       Impact factor: 2.804

7.  Relationship between contact time measurements and PTV values when using the Periotest to measure implant stability.

Authors:  N Meredith; B Friberg; L Sennerby; C Aparicio
Journal:  Int J Prosthodont       Date:  1998 May-Jun       Impact factor: 1.681

8.  Results of immediate loading for implant restoration in partially edentulous patients: a 6-month preliminary prospective study using SinusQuick™ EB implant system.

Authors:  Jong-Hwa Kim; Young-Kyun Kim; Yang-Jin Yi; Pil-Young Yun; Hyo-Jung Lee; Myung-Jin Kim; In-Sung Yeo
Journal:  J Adv Prosthodont       Date:  2009-11-30       Impact factor: 1.904

9.  In-patient comparison of immediately loaded and non-loaded implants within 6 months.

Authors:  Martin Lorenzoni; Christof Pertl; Kehao Zhang; Walther A Wegscheider
Journal:  Clin Oral Implants Res       Date:  2003-06       Impact factor: 5.977

10.  Peri-implant tissue and radiographic bone levels in the immediately restored single-tooth implant: a retrospective analysis.

Authors:  Marco Degidi; Diego Nardi; Adriano Piattelli
Journal:  J Periodontol       Date:  2008-02       Impact factor: 6.993

View more
  2 in total

Review 1.  Recent advances in dental implants.

Authors:  Do Gia Khang Hong; Ji-Hyeon Oh
Journal:  Maxillofac Plast Reconstr Surg       Date:  2017-11-05

Review 2.  Clinical Assessment of Dental Implant Stability During Follow-Up: What Is Actually Measured, and Perspectives.

Authors:  Elisabetta M Zanetti; Giulia Pascoletti; Michele Calì; Cristina Bignardi; Giordano Franceschini
Journal:  Biosensors (Basel)       Date:  2018-07-13
  2 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.