• DOI:10.1111/J.1708-8208.2003.TB00014.X
• Corpus ID: 44826017

Immediate and early function of Brånemark System implants placed in the esthetic zone: a 1-year prospective clinical multicenter study.

@article{Mal2003ImmediateAE,
  title={Immediate and early function of Br{\aa}nemark System implants placed in the esthetic zone: a 1-year prospective clinical multicenter study.},
  author={Paulo S Mal{\'o} and Bertil Friberg and Giovanni Polizzi and Federico Gualini and Torbj{\"o}rn Vighagen and Bo Rangert},
  journal={Clinical implant dentistry and related research},
  year={2003},
  volume={5 Suppl 1},
  pages={
          37-46
        }
}

• P. Maló, B. Friberg, +3 authors B. Rangert
• Published 1 March 2003
• Medicine
• Clinical implant dentistry and related research

BACKGROUND
Immediate/early implant function means great benefits for patients and therapists because treatment time and cost can be substantially reduced. This concept has become an accepted alternative for complete arch fixed restorations in the mandible, and clinical documentation is emerging for other indications.

PURPOSE
The purpose of this prospective clinical multicenter study was to evaluate the outcome of implants placed in incisor, canine, and premolar regions in maxillas or mandibles. Implants were loaded with provisional crowns and bridges on the same day or within a few days and were followed up for 1 year during function.

MATERIALS AND METHODS
Four centers treated 76 patients each in need of an implant-retained prosthesis in the anterior and premolar regions in the maxilla or mandible. A total of 116 titanium implants with machined surfaces (Brånemark System , Nobel Biocare AB, Gothenburg, Sweden) were placed: 74 in maxillas and 42 in mandibles. Eighty-seven prostheses were made, of which 63 were single crowns and 24 were bridges (supported by 53 splinted implants). Twenty-two implants in 14 patients were placed in fresh extraction sites. The goal with the preparation and insertion technique was to achieve good primary implant stability and a minimum implant insertion torque of 30 Ncm before the implant was completely seated. The occlusion was adjusted to eliminate direct contact with the provisional prostheses. After 6 months, the patients received their permanent prostheses. Sixty-seven patients were followed for 1 year.

RESULTS
Five implants were lost in five patients, three in the maxilla and two in the mandible. Four of the lost implants were single-tooth replacements and one was splinted. The cumulative survival rate (CSR) was 95.7% for all implants after 1 year and 93.7% and 98.1% for single-tooth and splinted implants, respectively. There were no implant losses in the extraction sites.

CONCLUSIONS
The CSR of 96% at 1 year indicates that immediate function of Brånemark System implants placed in incisor to premolar regions in both jaws is a viable concept. More failures occurred with single-tooth replacements (6.3%) than with splinted implants (1.9%).