Immediate provisional restoration of screw‐type implants in the posterior mandible: results after 5 years of clinical function

Abstract

The present data revealed results comparable to conventionally loaded implants. Careful patient selection in combination with high primary stability seem to be key factors for immediately loaded implants. Larger long-term randomized clinical trials are needed to confirm the final evidence of this protocol as the standard treatment concept for the partially edentulous mandible.

Immediate Occlusal versus Non‐Occlusal Loading of Implants: A Randomized Clinical Pilot Study

“…Suarez‐Feito and colleagues in their study found a 4.7 times increased risk for fracture of metal‐free provisionals with an opposing implant‐supported restoration and a higher cumulative survival probabilty for provisionals in immediately loaded implants when occluding on full dentures or natural teeth. Because of the small sample size in the present pilot study, no scientifically relevant data with respect to the impact of opposing dentitions could be analyzed; several recent papers comparing occlusal and nonocclusal immediate loading did not report any data about the opposing dentition (Zembic and colleagues, Margossian and colleagues, Payer and colleagues, Degidi and colleagues).…”

“…A major step in this direction has been to introduce concepts of immediate loading for use both in the mandible and in the maxilla. Immediate loading protocols have since been extensively discussed in the literature and found to be a viable treatment approach in selected cases with implant survival rates of 95 to 98.8% in the posterior mandible …”

Immediate occlusal vs nonocclusal loading of implants: A randomized prospective clinical pilot study and patient centered outcome after 36 months

“…4 The sample size of our study is too small for a statistical comparison of restorations with different numbers of units. 2 Iatrogenic manipulation of the implant in the early phase of osseointegration might play a role. 21 Investigating any effects of different loading protocols on implant survival/success, implant stability quotient, insertion torque, and marginal bone levels over 2 years, implant survival was 100% with both immediate nonfunctional and delayed loading vs 93% with immediate functional loading.…”

“…45 Our finding that occlusal and nonocclusal immediate restorations did perform equally well in partially edentulous posterior mandibles is consistent with two studies 4,11 but not with others. 2,47,48 Given that even a "high-load" scenario like the posterior mandible does not seem to affect the osseointegration of screw-type implants, a case could even be made for immediate definitive restorations. We also noted no differences between the single-unit and the splinted multi-unit restorations, and plaque and mucosal parameters were well within the range of similar reports.…”

Comparison between tapered and cylindrical implants in the posterior regions of the mandible: A prospective, randomized, split‐mouth clinical trial focusing on implant stability changes during early healing

“…Some clinical studies investigating the clinical performance of tapered implants in the posterior mandible are available in literature. Most of these are prospective studies and compare results of a single type to validate the usage of the immediate loading protocol or the clinical performance of the platform switch design . The literature also reports comparisons between two tapered implants, exploring the differences between prosthetic connections, implant neck designs, or thread shape .…”