Early loading of surface modified implants in the posterior mandible – 5 year results of an open prospective non‐controlled study

Abstract

The results confirm that early loading is a promising option also in posterior edentulism of the mandible.

A prospective, multi‐center study assessing early loading with short implants in posterior regions. A 3‐year post‐loading follow‐up study

“…15,16,[42][43][44][45] In this study, 4 early implant failures occurred and one implant rotated at 5 weeks post-surgery. The results are in agreement with those from several other studies as reported in a recent review on the outcomes of micro-rough surface Straumann 6 mm implants.…”

“…As no hypothesis was planned to be tested, a formal sample size calculation was not performed. However, based on earlier studies 16,23 it was estimated that 15 patients in total (5 in each center) should be enough to study changes over the time from baseline until consecutive visits. To further increase the precision of the studied variables and to compensate for possible patients dropping out during the long-term follow-up, it was decided to recruit 15 patients per center, a total of 45 subjects in the study.…”

“…Since then, several studies have confirmed that using early loading protocols for dental implants can have high survival rates and good clinical outcomes. [14][15][16][17][18] However, whether the early loading protocol can be used routinely remains unclear. This is particularly so in the posterior jaws, where the occlusal forces are much higher than in the anterior jaws; or with the short implants, which have less part engaged in bone.…”

Fatigue induced changes in conical implant–abutment connections

“…In the oral cavity they have to resist dynamic forces [3][4][5][6] and morse taper (conical) implant-abutment connections (IAC) have proven to be more fatigue resistant to mechanical loading [1,2,[7][8][9][10][11][12]. Nevertheless technical failures like veneer chipping orfracture, screw-or abutment loosening as well as implant fractures have been reported amounting up to 30-41% within 5 years [13][14][15][16][17]. Besides technical complications a variety of biological complications occur among which are periimplant mucositis and periimplantitis with a prevalence of 43% and 22% respectively [18,19].…”

Long-term Clinical Success of Minimally and Moderately Rough Oral Implants

“…,12 Olsson et al56 found similar results when the outcomes of about 35,444 implants placed at the Brånemark clinic between 1986 and 2010 were documented. 20,27,57,58 Between 1986 and 2002, the average early failure rates of system B implants in the mandible and maxilla were 1.84% and 8.95%, respectively, whereas the mean failure rates of moderately rough implants placed between 2003 and 2010 were 1.53% (mandible) and 2.65% (maxilla).Noteworthily, some implant systems (OsseoSpeed, 3 studies of 225 implants; Certain Prevail, 1 study of 86 implants) that were not included in the review because of too few documented cases had similar results of marginal bone loss and survival rate as the included implant systems.…”