Immediate and early non-occlusal loading of Straumann implants with a chemically modified surface (SLActive) in the...

Immediate and early loading of dental implants can simplify treatment and increase overall patient satisfaction. The purpose of this 3-year prospective randomized-controlled multicenter study was to assess the differences in survival rates and bone level changes between immediately and early-loaded implants with a new chemically modified surface (SLActive). This investigation shows interim results obtained after 5 months.

Patients > or =18 years of age missing at least one tooth in the posterior maxilla or mandible were enrolled in the study. Following implant placement, patients received a temporary restoration either on the day of surgery (immediate loading) or 28-34 days after surgery (early loading); restorations consisted of single crowns or two to four unit fixed dental prostheses. Permanent restorations were placed 20-23 weeks following surgery. The primary efficacy variable was change in bone level (assessed by standardized radiographs) from baseline to 5 months; secondary variables included implant survival and success rates.

A total of 266 patients were enrolled (118 males and 148 females), and a total of 383 implants were placed (197 and 186 in the immediate and early loading groups, respectively). Mean patient age was 46.3+/-12.8 years. After 5 months, implant survival rates were 98% in the immediate group and 97% in the early group. Mean bone level change from baseline was 0.81+/-0.89 mm in the immediate group and 0.56+/-0.73 mm in the early group (P<0.05). Statistical analysis revealed a significant center effect (P<0.0001) and a significant treatment x center interaction (P=0.008).

The results suggested that Straumann implants with an SLActive can be used predictably in time-critical (early or immediate) loading treatment protocols when appropriate patient selection criteria are observed. The mean bone level changes observed from baseline to 5 months (0.56 and 0.81 mm) corresponded to physiological observations from other studies, i.e., were not clinically significant. The presence of a significant center effect and treatment x center interaction indicated that the differences in bone level changes between the two groups were center dependent.