Share Page:

Volume 9 , Issue 5
September/October 1994

Pages 571-578

The Immediate Implant: A Retrospective Study Comparing the Different Types of Immediate Implantation

Nikoletta Mensdorff-Pouilly, MD, DMD/Robert Haas, MD, DMD/Georg Mailath, MD, DMD/George Watzek, MD, DMD

Between April 1988 and April 1992, 190 immediate implantations (93 primary immediate implantations and 97 secondary immediate implantations performed at 6 to 8 weeks postextraction) were performed at the Department of Oral Surgery of the Dental School of the University of Vienna, Austria. After an average follow-up of 12.4 months, peri-implant pocket depth, the gingival index, the hygienic index, and the degree of bone resorption were examined. A life-table approach (Kaplan-Meier) was applied for statistical analysis, and showed no difference between primary and secondary immediate implants. Also, none of the parameters examined demonstrated a statistically significant difference between the two groups. However, compared with the groups of secondary immediate implants, the group of primary immediate implants showed a tendency towards deeper pocket formation and an increased frequency of membrane dehiscences that may be due to the poorer quality of the soft tissue covering. ( INT J ORAL MAXILLOFAC IMPLANTS 1994;9:571578)

Key words: GBR technique, guided bone regeneration, immediate implantation

Full Text PDF File | Order Article


Get Adobe Reader
Adobe Acrobat Reader is required to view PDF files. This is a free program available from the Adobe web site.
Follow the download directions on the Adobe web site to get your copy of Adobe Acrobat Reader.


© 2020 Quintessence Publishing Co, Inc JOMI Home
Current Issue
Ahead of Print
Author Guidelines
Accepted Manuscripts
Submission Form
Quintessence Home
Terms of Use
Privacy Policy
About Us
Contact Us