Study compares immediate with early and conventional loading of dental implants
GUANGZHOU, China: Immediate loading of dental implants has become a popular option because it shortens treatment time, improves aesthetics and increases patient acceptance. Yet, up until now, it has remained unclear whether immediate loading can achieve equal clinical outcomes to early or conventional loading. In a review, researchers from Sun Yat-sen University in Guangzhou have compared the efficacy of immediate loading versus early or conventional loading of dental implants in patients treated with fixed prostheses. They found that immediate and conventional loading show a difference in implant survival rates.
The research team evaluated 39 randomised clinical trials, totalling 1,868 patients and 3,746 implants. Observation periods ranged from ten days to 15 years. When compared with conventional loading, which showed a survival rate of 98.6%, a significantly lower survival rate of 96.8% was observed for immediate loading of dental implants. Regarding other outcomes, including marginal bone level changes, peri-implant gingival level, probing depth and implant stability, no statistically significant differences were observed when comparing immediate versus early or conventional loading.
“The results showed that immediate loading represented a higher risk of implant failure than delayed loading, while presenting no difference in marginal bone level change or probing depth. When compared with early loading, immediate loading achieved similar implant survival rates and marginal bone level change,” the authors stated.
The study, titled “Immediate versus early or conventional loading dental implants with fixed prostheses: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled clinical trials”, was published online on 14 August 2019 in the Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry, ahead of inclusion in an issue.