Abstract
Aim and objective: This study aimed to assess the impact of the immediate and delayed clinical placement of implants on the crestal bone. Materials and methods: In this study, a total of 30 implant areas in 30 patients were analyzed. The study group constituted 14 male and 16 female participants in the age range of 20–40 years. A random allocation of the patients into one of the two groups (15 per group) was done as group I: immediate implant placement and group II: delayed implant placement. In both the groups, plaque index, gingival index, probing depth (PD) as well as crestal bone height was calculated at baseline, 3rd month, and 6th month. The statistical analysis was performed with Statistical Package for Social Sciences. The Student’s t-test was used for comparison between the two groups. Results: The group that received immediate implants depicted somewhat greater mean baseline plaque score and at 3 months (2.69 ± 0.18 and 3.82 ± 0.02) in comparison with the group that received delayed implants (2.54 ± 0.10 and 3.78 ± 0.03). Somewhat higher mean gingival score at baseline, 3 months, and 6 months (1.10 ± 0.09, 1.48 ± 0.30, and 1.36 ± 0.22) were seen with delayed implant placement in contrast to immediate implant placement (1.02 ± 0.21, 1.28 ± 0.16, and 1.34 ± 0.24). The immediate implant group exhibited a somewhat higher mean PD score at baseline and 3 months (2.87 ± 0.12 and 3.42 ± 0.09) in comparison with the delayed implant group (2.04 ± 0.07 and 3.31 ± 0.13). Delayed implant group had faintly advanced loss of bone (0.20 ± 0.02, 1.34 ± 0.11, 1.10 ± 0.13) when compared with the immediate implant group (0.14 ± 0.08, 1.08 ± 0.01, 0.98 ± 0.04) at baseline, 3rd, and 6th month in that order. A statistically significant dissimilarity was present at the 3 months interval among both the groups. Conclusion: This research concluded that immediate implant placement is significantly better than delayed implant placement. Preservation of crestal bone with prevention of collapse of the architecture of gingiva is achieved through immediate implant placement. The therapy time, preservation of esthetically acceptable gingiva as well as enhanced patient comfort is among the other advantages. Clinical significance: Implants provide a basis for prosthetic support. Recently, immediate implant placement has become increasingly popular due to short treatment duration and higher patient contentment.
Author supplied keywords
Cite
CITATION STYLE
Jalaluddin, M., Awasthi, N., Arun, M., Felix, C. B. P., Mailankote, S., & Soans, C. R. (2021). Evaluation of the impact of immediate and delayed implant placement on crestal bone: A comparative study. World Journal of Dentistry, 12(5), 376–380. https://doi.org/10.5005/jp-journals-10015-1857
Register to see more suggestions
Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.