| Title |
Conventional Implant Placement Has a Significantly Higher Survival Rate as Compared to Immediate Dental Implant Placement |
| Clinical Question |
Is the survival rate of conventional dental implant placement better than the immediate placement in adults? |
| Clinical Bottom Line |
The survival rate for conventional implant placement is significantly higher than that of immediately placed dental implants, although both are >95%. A systematic review and meta-analysis support this statement. There is also no additional cost or additional procedures required with conventional implant placement. |
| Best Evidence |
|
| PubMed ID |
Author / Year |
Patient Group |
Study type
(level of evidence) |
| 28478869 | Mello/2017 | 1,435 patients (mean age, 46.68 yrs) with 3,049 implants in 30 included papers | Meta-Analysis | | Key results | The study found that the survival rate of delayed implants (98.38%) was significantly greater than immediately placed implants (95.21%) (p= .001). There was no significant difference in marginal bone loss or probing depths. | |
| Evidence Search |
PubMed: fresh socket, healed socket, implant placement |
Comments on
The Evidence |
Validity: Studies were required to be randomized controlled trials, be prospective studies, have been published in English, have more than five implants in each group, and involve a follow-up period of at least 6 months in order to qualify for inclusion. Average follow-up was 24 months. Only 8 of the 30 papers were rated as high quality based on the risk of bias assessment. In most of the clinical trials "there was a high risk of bias concerning randomization and blinding of patients and surgeons." |
| Applicability |
The results of this study found that conventional implant osseous retention rates were better than immediate implant placement retention rates. Subjects in the meta-analysis are representative of patients seen in the clinic. All subjects were adults and consisted of nearly equal male to female ratios. The study contained participants in need of one or more dental implants. Some participants were current smokers or were periodontally involved. This demonstrates a representation of patients seen in the average practice. Treatment was also feasible. Dental implant placement is a common procedure that is done by a specialized dental professional. Some problems that occurred throughout the trails involved implant failure, insufficient surrounding bone structure, and improper healing. Benefits include proper occlusion for patients which aid in communication, eating, and esthetics. The value and expectations for the patient are that delayed implants have a significantly higher success rate than immediate implants.
|
| Specialty |
(General Dentistry) (Oral Surgery) (Periodontics) |
| Keywords |
fresh socket, healed socket, implant placement
|
| ID# |
3428 |
| Date of submission |
05/11/2020 |
| E-mail |
bravoj1@livemail.uthscsa.edu |
| Author |
Josefina Mallory |
| Co-author(s) |
Gerardo Suarez |
| Co-author(s) e-mail |
suarezg1@livemail.uthscsa.edu |
| Faculty mentor |
Carol Nguyen |
| Faculty mentor e-mail |
nguyenc@uthscsa.edu |
| |
|
Basic Science Rationale
(Mechanisms that may account for and/or explain the clinical question, i.e. is the answer to the clinical question consistent with basic biological, physical and/or behavioral science principles, laws and research?) |
| None available | |
 |
Comments and Evidence-Based Updates on the CAT
(FOR PRACTICING DENTISTS', FACULTY, RESIDENTS and/or STUDENTS COMMENTS ON PUBLISHED CATs) |
| None available | |