Survival Rates and Factors Affecting the Outcome Following Immediate and Delayed Implant Placement: A Retrospective Study

Abstract

Background: Immediate implant placement into extraction sockets has become a widely acceptable treatment option to decrease treatment time and enhance esthetics. The objectives of this study were to assess and compare the survival rates of immediate and delayed implant treatment as well as to investigate the effect of patient- and site-related variables on the treatment outcome in a large-scale population-based study. Methods: Dental records of patients who received implant therapy were retrieved from the electronic records of the University of Minnesota School of Dentistry. Demographic characteristics, dental insurance status, socioeconomic status as well as medical history and tobacco use were recorded. The treatment outcome was included as a binary variable (survival/failure). Time to failure (date of procedure to date of visit with failure) was compared between immediate and delayed implant treatment in Cox regression models. Kaplan–Meier plots for the survival of both treatment modalities were created. Patient-sites without failure were censored at the last follow-up visit. Results: A total of 4519 records of implants were included. The sample mean age was 60.27 years and included 50.7% males and 12.9% tobacco users. High socioeconomic status was characterized for 82.3% of the included population and 63.0% of them were self-payers. Immediate implants were significantly more frequently placed in the maxillary arch (p < 0.001) than in the mandible. Tobacco users received more often a delayed rather than an immediate implant placement (p = 0.001). The survival rate analysis revealed there were no significant differences between immediate and delayed implant placements (p = 0.48). The mean follow-up time was 32.27 months during which 1.5% immediate and 1.1% delayed implants were removed. The estimated mean survival time for immediate implants was 68.90 months, while delayed implants placed in healed sockets showed a mean survival time of 75.11 months. A statistically significant association was found between gender (p = 0.03) and osteoporosis (p = 0.001) with treatment outcome. Conclusions: The placement of immediate implants achieved similarly high survival rates when compared to delayed implants placed in healed sites. Males and osteoporotic individuals showed significantly higher implant failure than females and non-osteoporotic patients. This study demonstrated that both immediate and delayed implant placements are sound options with predictable treatment outcome.

Survival and Success Rate of Implants in Overdentures: Analyzing Patient and Implant Factors

“…In several previous studies, the 5-year survival rates of implants have been reported to range from 96.8% to 99.1%, while the 5-year success rates were reported as 95% to 97%. [11][12][13][14][15] The 5-year survival and success rates of implants for overdentures were reported as 93% to 97%. [16][17][18][19][20] Therefore, it has been found that the survival and success rates of implants for fixed prostheses and overdentures are similar, and the rates observed in the present study are consistent with those reported in previous studies.…”

Immediate Loading of Implants with Fixed Rehabilitations in Geriatric Edentulous Patients; Biological Complications

“…A recent study demonstrated that both immediate and delayed implant placements are sound options with predictable treatment outcomes for full-arch rehabilitations [34]. A total of 4519 records of implants were included.…”

Lower Jaw Full-Arch Restoration: A Completely Digital Approach to Immediate Load

“…A notable outcome arising from the integration of clinical -biological research and materials engineering is the widespread adoption of immediate loading for full-arch edentulous dental implants [7]. Initially a topic of contention among dental professionals, this practice has undergone rigorous research and extensive clinical studies, solidifying its credibility and legitimacy in dental practice through medium-and long-term follow-up investigations [8][9][10]. The research on this topic has not only affirmed the legitimacy of immediate loading in dental practice, but has also underscored its clinical significance, boosting confidence among both dental professionals and patients [8].…”