Interventions for replacing missing teeth: dental implants in fresh extraction sockets (immediate, immediate-delayed and delayed implants).
BACKGROUND
'Immediate' implants are placed in dental sockets just after tooth extraction. 'Immediate-delayed' implants are those implants inserted after weeks up to about a couple of months to allow for soft tissue healing. 'Delayed' implants are those placed thereafter in partially or completely healed bone. The potential advantages of immediate implants are that treatment time can be shortened and that bone volumes might be partially maintained thus possibly providing good aesthetic results. The potential disadvantages are an increased risk of infection and failures. After implant placement in postextractive sites, gaps can be present between the implant and the bony walls. It is possible to fill these gaps and to augment bone simultaneously to implant placement. There are many techniques to achieve this but it is unclear when augmentation is needed and which could be the best augmentation technique.


OBJECTIVE
To evaluate success, complications, aesthetics and patient satisfaction between 'immediate', 'immediate-delayed' and 'delayed' implants.To evaluate whether and when augmentation procedures are necessary and which is the most effective technique.


METHODS
The Cochrane Oral Health Group's Trials Register (to 2 June 2010), CENTRAL (The Cochrane Library 2010, Issue 2), MEDLINE via OVID (1950 - 2 June 2010) and EMBASE via OVID (1980 - 2 June 2010) were searched. Several dental journals were handsearched.


METHODS
Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing immediate, immediate-delayed, and delayed implants, or comparing various bone augmentation procedures around the inserted implants, reporting the outcome of the interventions to at least 1 year after functional loading.


METHODS
Screening of eligible studies, assessment of the methodological quality of the trials and data extraction were conducted independently and in duplicate. Trial authors were contacted for any missing information. Results were expressed as random-effects models using mean differences for continuous outcomes and risk ratios (RR) for dichotomous outcomes with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). The statistical unit of the analysis was the patient.


RESULTS
Fourteen eligible RCTs were identified but only seven trials could be included. Four RCTs evaluated implant placement timing. Two RCTs compared immediate versus delayed implants in 126 patients and found no statistically significant differences. One RCT compared immediate-delayed versus delayed implants in 46 patients. After 2 years patients in the immediate-delayed group perceived the time to functional loading significantly shorter, were more satisfied and independent blinded assessor judged the level of the perimplant marginal mucosa in relation to that of the adjacent teeth as more appropriate (RR = 1.68; 95% CI 1.04 to 2.72). These differences disappeared 5 years after loading but significantly more complications occurred in the immediate-delayed group (RR = 4.20; 95% CI 1.01 to 17.43). One RCT compared immediate with immediately delayed implants in 16 patients for 2 years and found no differences. Three RCTs evaluated different techniques of bone grafting for implants immediately placed in extraction sockets. No statistically significant difference was observed when evaluating whether autogenous bone is needed in postextractive sites (1 trial with 26 patients) or which was the most effective augmentation technique (2 trials with 56 patients).


CONCLUSIONS
There is insufficient evidence to determine possible advantages or disadvantages of immediate, immediate-delayed or delayed implants, therefore these preliminary conclusions are based on few underpowered trials often judged to be at high risk of bias. There is a suggestion that immediate and immediate-delayed implants may be at higher risks of implant failures and complications than delayed implants on the other hand the aesthetic outcome might be better when placing implants just after teeth extraction. There is not enough reliable evidence supporting or refuting the need for augmentation procedures at immediate implants placed in fresh extraction sockets or whether any of the augmentation techniques is superior to the others.
Esposito
Marco
M
Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, School of Dentistry, The University of Manchester, Coupland 3 Building, Oxford Road, Manchester, UK, M13 9PL.
Grusovin
Maria Gabriella
MG
Polyzos
Ilias P
IP
Felice
Pietro
P
Worthington
Helen V
HV
D019072:Antibiotic Prophylaxis; D003758:Dental Implantation, Endosseous / Q000379:methods*; D015921:Dental Implants / Q000523:psychology; D019232:Dental Restoration Failure; D006801:Humans; D017060:Patient Satisfaction; D016032:Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; D013997:Time Factors; D014081:Tooth Extraction
D015921:Dental Implants
Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2008 Jul-Aug;23(4):733-43
18807572
Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent. 1989;9(1):34-41
2599780
Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2003 Mar-Apr;18(2):189-99
12705296
Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2004;19 Suppl:12-25
15635942
Clin Oral Implants Res. 2005 Apr;16(2):176-84
15777327
Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 1997 May-Jun;12(3):299-309
9197094
J Periodontol. 2005 May;76(5):821-31
15898944
Clin Oral Implants Res. 2009 Jul;20(7):742-9
19302393
J Periodontol. 2005 Apr;76(4):605-13
15857102
Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2006 Sep-Oct;21(5):696-710
17066630
Clin Oral Implants Res. 2007 Oct;18(5):552-62
17608739
J Periodontol. 1994 Sep;65(9):881-91
7990026
Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 1997 Jan-Feb;12(1):43-51
9048453
J Clin Periodontol. 2005 May;32(5):480-7
15842263
Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2002 Mar-Apr;17(2):249-57
11958408
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2003;(3):CD003607
12917975
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2008 Jul 16;(3):CD003607
18646092
Clin Oral Implants Res. 2008 Nov;19(11):1148-53
18983318
Clin Oral Implants Res. 2000 Dec;11(6):572-82
11168251
Scand J Plast Reconstr Surg Suppl. 1977;16:1-132
356184
J Periodontol. 1997 Mar;68(3):299-305
9100206
Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2005 Sep-Oct;20(5):753-61
16274150
Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent. 1989;9(5):332-43
2640210
Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent. 2004 Dec;24(6):555-63
15626318
J Periodontol. 2000 Nov;71(11):1743-9
11128923
Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 1994 Jan-Feb;9(1):31-40
8150510
Int J Epidemiol. 2002 Feb;31(1):140-9
11914310
Clin Oral Implants Res. 2004 Aug;15(4):498-503
15248886
BMJ. 1997 Sep 13;315(7109):629-34
9310563
J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2009 Nov;67(11 Suppl):89-107
19835754
J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 1991 Dec;49(12):1269-76
1659621
Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod. 2006 Jun;101(6):705-10
16731387
J Periodontol. 2004 Dec;75(12):1605-12
15732861
Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 1996 Mar-Apr;11(2):205-9
8666452
Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2003 Nov-Dec;18(6):856-64
14696661
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2006 Oct 18;(4):CD005968
17054267
J Oral Rehabil. 2008 Jan;35 Suppl 1:33-43
18181932
Int J Prosthodont. 1998 Jul-Aug;11(4):312-6
9758994
Eur J Oral Sci. 1998 Jun;106(3):721-64
9672097
J Periodontol. 2005 Oct;76(10):1785-92
16253102
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2006 Jan 25;(1):CD003607
16437460
J Periodontol. 1991 Jul;62(7):468-72
1656010