Related Experiment Video
Updated: Sep 25, 2026
Real-Time Dynamic Navigation System for the Precise Quad-Zygomatic Implant Placement in a Patient with a Severely Atrophic Maxilla
Published on: October 18, 2021
Clinical and radiologic evaluation of 2-stage IMZ implants placed in a single-stage procedure: 2-year results of a
Kees Heydenrijk1, Gerry M Raghoebar, Henny J A Meijer
1Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery and Maxillofacial Prosthetics, University Hospital Groningen, The Netherlands. heydenrijk@kchir.azg.nl
Purpose:
The aim of this study was to evaluate the feasibility of using a 2-stage implant system in a single-stage procedure and to study the impact of the microgap between the implant and the abutment.
Materials And Methods:
Sixty edentulous patients (Cawood class V or VI) participated in this study. After randomization, 20 patients received 2 IMZ implants placed in a single-stage procedure, 20 patients received 2 IMZ implants placed in the traditional 2-stage procedure, and 20 patients were treated with 2 ITI implants (single-stage procedure). The implants were placed in the canine area of the mandible. After 3 months, mandibular overdentures were fabricated, supported by a bar-and-clip attachment. A standardized clinical and radiographic evaluation was performed immediately after prosthesis placement and after 12 and 24 months.
Results:
One IMZ implant of the 1-stage group and 1 IMZ implant of the 2-stage group were lost after 6 and 12 months, respectively. Apart from several significant but clinically irrelevant differences, the 3 groups did not appear to differ markedly with regard to clinical parameters during the evaluation period. The mean bone loss within the first 2 years of functioning (1.1 mm IMZ 1-stage, 0.8 mm IMZ 2-stage, 1.2 mm ITI) was comparable for the 3 groups.
Discussion And Conclusions:
The results of this study suggest that dental implants designed for a submerged implantation procedure can also be used in a single-stage procedure and may be as predictable as when the same implants used in a 2-stage procedure or as 1-stage implants. Placement of the microgap at the crestal level in 2-stage implants did not appear to have an adverse effect on the amount of peri-implant bone loss at 2 years in this study population.