Immediate Loading of Conical Connection Implants: Up-to-2-Year Retrospective Clinical and Radiologic Study

Abstract

This assignment applies to all translations of the Work as well as to preliminary display/posting of the abstract of the accepted article in electronic form before publication. If any changes in authorship (order, deletions, or additions) occur after the manuscript is submitted, agreement by all authors for such changes must be on file with the Publisher. An author's name may be removed only at his/her written request. (Note: Material prepared by employees of the US government in the course of their official duties cannot be copyrighted.

An open prospective single cohort multicenter study evaluating the novel, tapered, conical connection implants supporting single crowns in the anterior and premolar maxilla: interim 1-year results

“…More importantly, after the initial bone loss, a mean bone gain of 0.11 ± 1.06 mm between the 6-month and 1-year follow-ups was observed, indicating healthy hard-tissue response with this implant. However, the marginal bone remodeling values reported here differ from those of previously published studies evaluating the same implant design [22, 23]. In those studies, the mean marginal bone remodeling at 1 year was −0.42 mm.…”

“…This limitation could contribute to the low marginal bone remodeling seen in the previous studies. This conclusion was confirmed by the retrospective study, which showed higher bone loss in healed sites compared with extraction sites [22]. …”

“…The present study was restricted to implants in maxillary anterior and premolar teeth, whereas the two Pozzi et al studies did not limit the position of the implant site. In addition, implants in this study were placed in healed sites, whereas Pozzi et al placed 40–45% of implants in fresh extraction sockets [22, 23]. Studies have shown that post-extraction socket preservation techniques can limit horizontal and vertical ridge alterations, especially within the first year [32].…”

“…To date, only one prospective and one retrospective study using this implant have been published [22, 23]. In both studies, authors evaluated implant placement for a wide variety of indications.…”

“…The outcome was measured for all tooth locations; in both healed and fresh extraction sites; with a wide range of insertion torques; and using narrow, normal, and wide platform implants. Follow-up was at 2 and 3 years in the retrospective and prospective studies, respectively [22, 23]. While these studies indicated that the tapered conical connection implant is effective and reliable for immediate loading applications, more clinical data are needed to assess the utility of this implant, especially for applications in the anterior maxilla.…”