Immediate versus conventional loading of palatal implants in humans: a first report of a multicenter RCT.
This study aims to analyze the clinical performance of two loading concepts on second-generation palatal implants (Orthosystem, Straumann, Basel, Switzerland) in a prospective multicenter randomized controlled clinical trial. At the time of this interim analysis, 41 patients have been randomized on a 1:1 basis to one of two treatment groups. Group 1 underwent conventional loading of palatal implants after a healing period of 12 weeks (gold standard) while group 2 underwent immediate implant loading within 1 week after implant insertion. We report initial results at 6 months after functional loading. The primary outcome parameter was implant success (no implant mobility, no implant loss). The implants in both groups were initially stable at the time of insertion, and all were eligible for randomization. Twenty-two patients (group 1) were subjected to conventional implant loading after 12 weeks while 19 patients (group 2) received immediate functional loading within the first week after insertion. Direct (e.g. distal jet appliances) as well as indirect forms of anchorage (conventional or modified transpalatal arch) were used. The magnitude of orthodontic forces ranged between 1 and 4 N for the immediate loading group and between 1 and 5 N for the conventional loading group. One implant in group 1 was lost during the healing phase. One dropout was registered in group 2. Thirty-nine implants were functionally loaded for over 6 months now. These preliminary data provide first evidence of the fact that immediate loading of palatal implants yields equivalent success rates as conventional loading to 4 N after 6 months.
Jung
Britta A
BA
Department of Orthodontics, University Medical Center Mainz, Mainz, Germany. brjung@uni-mainz.de
Harzer
Winfried
W
Wehrbein
Heinrich
H
Gedrange
Tomasz
T
Hopfenmüller
Werner
W
Lüdicke
Gabriele
G
Moergel
Maximilian
M
Diedrich
Peter
P
Kunkel
Martin
M
D000134:Acid Etching, Dental / Q000379:methods; D000293:Adolescent; D000328:Adult; D000368:Aged; D002648:Child; D045662:Dental Etching / Q000379:methods; D015921:Dental Implants; D017267:Dental Prosthesis Design; D005260:Female; D005500:Follow-Up Studies; D006801:Humans; D057893:Immediate Dental Implant Loading / Q000379:methods*; D008297:Male; D008310:Malocclusion / Q000145:classification / Q000628:therapy; D008875:Middle Aged; D052280:Orthodontic Anchorage Procedures / Q000295:instrumentation / Q000379:methods*; D016382:Orthodontic Appliance Design; D009967:Orthodontic Appliances; D016348:Osseointegration / Q000502:physiology; D021362:Palate, Hard / Q000601:surgery*; D011446:Prospective Studies; D013314:Stress, Mechanical; D013499:Surface Properties; D014087:Tooth Movement Techniques / Q000295:instrumentation / Q000379:methods; D016896:Treatment Outcome; D055815:Young Adult
D015921:Dental Implants
J Periodontol. 2003 Feb;74(2):225-41
12666712
Clin Oral Implants Res. 2004 Feb;15(1):8-17
14731173
Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 1986 Summer;1(1):11-25
3527955
Clin Oral Implants Res. 2008 Jul;19(7):665-9
18492083
Trials. 2007 Sep 20;8:24
17883841
J Orofac Orthop. 2008 Jul;69(4):297-308
18797833
Clin Oral Implants Res. 2006 Oct;17 Suppl 2:19-34
16968379
Angle Orthod. 2009 Jan;79(1):85-90
19123693
Clin Oral Implants Res. 2004 Oct;15(5):529-39
15355394
J Craniomaxillofac Surg. 2008 Jan;36(1):21-7
17988886
Clin Oral Implants Res. 1998 Oct;9(5):348-53
9835815
Clin Oral Implants Res. 2009 Aug;20(8):833-7
19508340
Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent. 2007 Jun;27(3):277-85
17694951
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2009 Jan 21;(1):CD003878
19160225
Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2004 Sep-Oct;19(5):721-30
15508989
Clin Oral Implants Res. 2006 Aug;17(4):445-50
16907777