Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Comparing the Long-term Success Rates of Immediate Implant Placement vs. Delayed Implant Placement in Patients with Periodontally Compromised Teeth.
Alam, Mohammad K; Bagde, Hiroj S; Alhamwan, Abdullah Khalid A; Aljubab, Hamed Muhanned H; Alrashedi, Faisal Fraih A; Aljameeli, Dhari Hameed M; Sghaireen, Mohammed G.
Afiliação
  • Alam MK; Department of Preventive Dentistry, College of Dentistry, Jouf University, Sakaka, Saudi Arabia.
  • Bagde HS; Department of Dental Research Cell, Saveetha Institute of Medical and Technical Sciences, Saveetha Dental College and Hospitals, Chennai, Tamil Nadu, India.
  • Alhamwan AKA; Department of Public Health, Faculty of Allied Health Sciences, Daffodil International University, Dhaka, Bangladesh.
  • Aljubab HMH; Professor, Department of Periodontology, CDCRI, Rajnandgaon, Chhattisgarh, India.
  • Alrashedi FFA; Department of Preventive Dentistry, College of Dentistry, Jouf University, Sakaka, Saudi Arabia.
  • Aljameeli DHM; Department of Preventive Dentistry, College of Dentistry, Jouf University, Sakaka, Saudi Arabia.
  • Sghaireen MG; Department of Preventive Dentistry, College of Dentistry, Jouf University, Sakaka, Saudi Arabia.
J Pharm Bioallied Sci ; 16(Suppl 1): S626-S628, 2024 Feb.
Article em En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38595549
ABSTRACT

Background:

This study aims to compare the long-term success rates of immediate implant placement and delayed implant placement in patients with periodontally compromised teeth. Materials and

Methods:

A total of 30 patients presenting with periodontally compromised teeth requiring extraction and subsequent implant placement were enrolled in this retrospective study. Patients were divided into two groups based on the timing of implant placement Group A (immediate implant placement) and Group B (delayed implant placement). Implants were placed according to standard protocols. Patient records were reviewed for implant survival, peri-implant bone loss, and prosthetic complications. Data were statistically analyzed using appropriate tests.

Results:

The mean follow-up period was 5 years. In Group A, the implant survival rate was 90%, while in Group B, it was 83%. The mean peri-implant bone loss was 1.5 mm in Group A and 2.2 mm in Group B. Prosthetic complications were observed in three cases in Group A and five cases in Group B. The differences in implant survival and bone loss between the two groups were not statistically significant (P > 0.05).

Conclusion:

Both immediate implant placement and delayed implant placement demonstrated comparable long-term success rates in patients with periodontally compromised teeth.
Palavras-chave

Texto completo: 1 Coleções: 01-internacional Base de dados: MEDLINE Idioma: En Revista: J Pharm Bioallied Sci Ano de publicação: 2024 Tipo de documento: Article

Texto completo: 1 Coleções: 01-internacional Base de dados: MEDLINE Idioma: En Revista: J Pharm Bioallied Sci Ano de publicação: 2024 Tipo de documento: Article