Clinical efficacy of early loading versus conventional loading of dental implants

Yanfei Zhu, Xinyi Zheng, Guanqi Zeng, Yi Xu, Xinhua Qu, Min Zhu, Eryi Lu, Yanfei Zhu, Xinyi Zheng, Guanqi Zeng, Yi Xu, Xinhua Qu, Min Zhu, Eryi Lu

Abstract

The aim of this study was to determine the clinical differences between early and conventional loading protocols for dental implants. A comprehensive search of the Medline, Embase, and OVID databases for studies published through January 10, 2015 was conducted. Fourteen studies were included in our analysis. We found that early loading imposed a significantly higher risk of implant failure than did conventional loading (risk ratio = 2.09, 95% confidence interval [CI] [1.18, 3.69], P = 0.01), while no significant differences between the methods were found with regards to the marginal bone loss (weighted mean differences [WMD] = 0.11, 95% CI [-0.07, 0.28], P = 0.23), periotest value (WMD = 0.02, 95% CI [-0.83, 0.87], P = 0.96), or implant stability quotient (WMD = 0.79, 95% CI [-0.03, 1.62], P = 0.06). As for the health status of the peri-implant tissue, conventionally loaded implants demonstrated better performance than did early loaded implants. Subgroup analyses demonstrated that the sample size, time of publication, loading definition, implant position, extent, and restoration type influenced the results. Although early implant loading is convenient and comfortable for patients, this method still cannot achieve the same clinical outcomes as the conventional loading method.

Figures

Figure 1. Flow-chart depicting the literature search…
Figure 1. Flow-chart depicting the literature search procedure.
Figure 2. Forrest plots of the individual…
Figure 2. Forrest plots of the individual studies for the implant failure rate.
Note that Tawse-Smith (2002) (test 1) and (test 2) indicate that in the same study, two controlled experiments were performed. Ma (2010) (test 1) and (test 2) indicate that in the same study, two different test groups were compared to the same control group.
Figure 3. Forrest plots of the individual…
Figure 3. Forrest plots of the individual studies for the marginal bone loss.
Figure 4. Forrest plots of the individual…
Figure 4. Forrest plots of the individual studies for the periotest value.
Figure 5. Forrest plots of the individual…
Figure 5. Forrest plots of the individual studies for the implant stability quotient.

References

    1. Branemark P. I. et al. Osseointegrated implants in the treatment of the edentulous jaw. Experience from a 10-year period. Scand J Plast Reconstr Surg Suppl 16, 1–132 (1977).
    1. Branemark P. I. et al. Osseointegrated titanium fixtures in the treatment of edentulousness. Biomaterials 4, 25–8 (1983).
    1. Schatzker J., Horne J. G. & Sumner-Smith G. The effect of movement on the holding power of screws in bone. Clin Orthop Relat Res 111, 257–62 (1975).
    1. Roberts W. E., Smith R. K., Zilberman Y., Mozsary P. G. & Smith R. S. Osseous adaptation to continuous loading of rigid endosseous implants. Am J Orthod 86, 95–111 (1984).
    1. Gao S. S., Zhang Y. R., Zhu Z. L. & Yu H. Y. Micromotions and combined damages at the dental implant/bone interface. Int J Oral Sci 4, 182–8 (2012).
    1. Borges Tde F. et al. Mandibular overdentures with immediate loading: satisfaction and quality of life. Int J Prosthodont 24, 534–9 (2011).
    1. Erkapers M., Ekstrand K., Baer R. A., Toljanic J. A. & Thor A. Patient satisfaction following dental implant treatment with immediate loading in the edentulous atrophic maxilla. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 26, 356–64 (2011).
    1. Cochran D. L., Morton D. & Weber H. P. Consensus statements and recommended clinical procedures regarding loading protocols for endosseous dental implants. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 19 Suppl, 109–13 (2004).
    1. Sanz-Sanchez I., Sanz-Martin I., Figuero E. & Sanz M. Clinical efficacy of immediate implant loading protocols compared to conventional loading depending on the type of the restoration: a systematic review. Clin Oral Implants Res 26, 964–82 (2015).
    1. Esposito M., Grusovin M. G., Maghaireh H. & Worthington H. V. Interventions for replacing missing teeth: different times for loading dental implants. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 3, CD003878 (2013).
    1. Capelli M. et al. A 5-year report from a multicentre randomised clinical trial: immediate non-occlusal versus early loading of dental implants in partially edentulous patients. Eur J Oral Implantol 3, 209–19 (2010).
    1. Higgins J. P., Thompson S. G. & Spiegelhalter D. J. A re-evaluation of random-effects meta-analysis. J R Stat Soc Ser A Stat Soc 172, 137–159 (2009).
    1. Ten Heggeler J. M., Slot D. E. & Van der Weijden G. A. Effect of socket preservation therapies following tooth extraction in non-molar regions in humans: a systematic review. Clin Oral Implants Res 22, 779–88 (2011).
    1. Higgins J. P., Thompson S. G., Deeks J. J. & Altman D. G. Measuring inconsistency in meta-analyses. BMJ 327, 557–60 (2003).
    1. DerSimonian R. & Laird N. Meta-analysis in clinical trials. Control Clin Trials 7, 177–88 (1986).
    1. Egger M., Davey Smith G., Schneider M. & Minder C. Bias in meta-analysis detected by a simple, graphical test. BMJ 315, 629–34 (1997).
    1. Engquist B. et al. Simplified methods of implant treatment in the edentulous lower jaw. Part II: Early loading. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res 6, 90–100 (2004).
    1. Engquist B. et al. Simplified methods of implant treatment in the edentulous lower jaw: a 3-year follow-up report of a controlled prospective study of one-stage versus two-stage surgery and early loading. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res 7, 95–104 (2005).
    1. Eliasson A. On the role of number of fixtures, surgical technique and timing of loading. Swed Dent J Suppl, 3–95 (2008).
    1. Eliasson A., Blomqvist F., Wennerberg A. & Johansson A. A retrospective analysis of early and delayed loading of full-arch mandibular prostheses using three different implant systems: clinical results with up to 5 years of loading. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res 11, 134–48 (2009).
    1. Turkyilmaz I. Clinical and radiological results of patients treated with two loading protocols for mandibular overdentures on Branemark implants. J Clin Periodontol 33, 233–8 (2006c).
    1. Turkyilmaz I., Tumer C., Avci M., Hersek N. & Celik-Bagci E. A short-term clinical trial on selected outcomes for immediately loaded implant-supported mandibular overdentures. Int J Prosthodont 19, 515–9 (2006d).
    1. Turkyilmaz I. & Tumer C. Early versus late loading of unsplinted TiUnite surface implants supporting mandibular overdentures: a 2-year report from a prospective study. J Oral Rehabil 34, 773–80 (2007b).
    1. Fischer K. & Stenberg T. Early loading of ITI implants supporting a maxillary full-arch prosthesis: 1-year data of a prospective, randomized study. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 19, 374–81 (2004).
    1. Fischer K. & Stenberg T. Three-year data from a randomizd, controlled study of early loading of single-stage dental implants supporting maxillary full-arch prostheses. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 21, 245–52 (2006).
    1. Fischer K., Stenberg T., Hedin M. & Sennerby L. Five-year results from a randomized, controlled trial on early and delayed loading of implants supporting full-arch prosthesis in the edentulous maxilla. Clin Oral Implants Res 19, 433–41 (2008).
    1. Turkyilmaz I., Tozum T. F., Tumer C. & Ozbek E. N. A 2-year clinical report of patients treated with two loading protocols for mandibular overdentures: early versus conventional loading. J Periodontol 77, 1998–2004 (2006a).
    1. Turkyilmaz I., Sennerby L., Tumer C., Yenigul M. & Avci M. Stability and marginal bone level measurements of unsplinted implants used for mandibular overdentures: a 1-year randomized prospective clinical study comparing early and conventional loading protocols. Clin Oral Implants Res 17, 501–5 (2006b).
    1. Turkyilmaz I., Tozum T. F. & Tumer C. Early versus delayed loading of mandibular implant-supported overdentures: 5-year results. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res 12 Suppl 1, e39–46 (2010).
    1. Turkyilmaz I., Tozum T. F., Fuhrmann D. M. & Tumer C. Seven-year follow-up results of TiUnite implants supporting mandibular overdentures: early versus delayed loading. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res 14 Suppl 1, e83–90 (2012).
    1. Ma S., Tawse-Smith A., Thomson W. M. & Payne A. G. Marginal bone loss with mandibular two-implant overdentures using different loading protocols and attachment systems: 10-year outcomes. Int J Prosthodont 23, 321–32 (2010).
    1. Tawse-Smith A., Payne A. G., Kumara R. & Thomson W. M. Early loading of unsplinted implants supporting mandibular overdentures using a one-stage operative procedure with two different implant systems: a 2-year report. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res 4, 33–42 (2002).
    1. Anil Kumar S., Sahoo N., Radhakrishnan V. & Sandhu H. S. Clinical evaluation of early loaded and unloaded implants in edentulous mandible. J Maxillofac Oral Surg 11, 21–8 (2012).
    1. Ericsson I., Randow K., Nilner K. & Peterson A. Early functional loading of Branemark dental implants: 5-year clinical follow-up study. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res 2, 70–7 (2000).
    1. Roynesdal A. K., Amundrud B. & Hannaes H. R. A comparative clinical investigation of 2 early loaded ITI dental implants supporting an overdenture in the mandible. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 16, 246–51 (2001).
    1. De Smet E., Duyck J., Vander Sloten J., Jacobs R. & Naert I. Timing of loading—immediate, early, or delayed—in the outcome of implants in the edentulous mandible: a prospective clinical trial. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 22, 580–94 (2007).
    1. Turkyilmaz I., Avci M., Kuran S. & Ozbek E. N. A 4-year prospective clinical and radiological study of maxillary dental implants supporting single-tooth crowns using early and delayed loading protocols. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res 9, 222–7 (2007a).
    1. Payne A. G., Tawse-Smith A., Duncan W. D. & Kumara R. Conventional and early loading of unsplinted ITI implants supporting mandibular overdentures. Clin Oral Implants Res 13, 603–9 (2002).
    1. Barewal R. M., Stanford C. & Weesner T. C. A randomized controlled clinical trial comparing the effects of three loading protocols on dental implant stability. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 27, 945–56 (2012).
    1. Meredith N., Book K., Friberg B., Jemt T. & Sennerby L. Resonance frequency measurements of implant stability in vivo. A cross-sectional and longitudinal study of resonance frequency measurements on implants in the edentulous and partially dentate maxilla. Clin Oral Implants Res 8, 226–33 (1997).
    1. Stafford G. L. Different loading times for dental implants - no clinically important differences? Evid Based Dent 14, 109–10 (2013).
    1. Alsabeeha N., Atieh M. & Payne A. G. Loading protocols for mandibular implant overdentures: a systematic review with meta-analysis. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res 12 Suppl 1, e28–38 (2010).
    1. Su M. et al. Comparison of implant success rates with different loading protocols: a meta-analysis. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 29, 344–52 (2014).

Source: PubMed

Sponsorer och medarbetare

Medicinska tillstånd

Läkemedelsinterventioner

3
Prenumerera