Asset Details
Do you wish to reserve the book?
Early versus conventional loading for fully guided immediate implant placement in molar sites: a randomized controlled clinical study
Hey, we have placed the reservation for you!
By the way, why not check out events that you can attend while you pick your title.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place the reservation. Kindly try again later.
Are you sure you want to remove the book from the shelf?
Early versus conventional loading for fully guided immediate implant placement in molar sites: a randomized controlled clinical study
Do you wish to request the book?
Early versus conventional loading for fully guided immediate implant placement in molar sites: a randomized controlled clinical study
Please be aware that the book you have requested cannot be checked out. If you would like to checkout this book, you can reserve another copy
We have requested the book for you!
Your request is successful and it will be processed during the Library working hours. Please check the status of your request in My Requests.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place your request. Kindly try again later.
Journal Article
Early versus conventional loading for fully guided immediate implant placement in molar sites: a randomized controlled clinical study
2025
Overview
Purpose
To evaluate early versus conventional loading in immediate implants for molars. This study aims to answer the following PICO (Patient, Intervention, Comparison, and Outcome) question: In patients over 18 years of age, does early loading of immediately placed implants in molar areas result in a similar implant survival rate and marginal bone loss as conventional loading?
Methods
Twenty-seven patients (15 women and 12 men) received a total of 30 implants immediately after molar extraction. The surgical treatment protocol entailed atraumatic tooth extraction without flap elevation. Non-invasive quantitative analyses were used to assess implant stability. After an uneventful healing period, the 30 implants were restored with screw-retained monolithic zirconia prosthesis, half of which after 6 weeks (G1) and the other half after 3 months (G2).
Results
Regarding the survival rate, the Kaplan–Meier and log-rank test showed that there was no statistically significant difference between both groups (
p
= 1). Implant stability quotient at the prosthetic phase of both groups (6 weeks in G1 and 3 months in G2) revealed no statistically significant difference (G1 RFA74.4 (SD 5.54) − DCA 79.07 (SD 5.75))/G2 RFA 73.67 (SD 5.7), − DCA78.93 (SD 4.48).
Conclusions
Early loading of immediately placed implants in molar sites is considered a predictable treatment modality provided that ideal implant position and adequate insertion torque are achieved.
Publisher
Springer Berlin Heidelberg,Springer Nature B.V,SpringerOpen
