Mechanical versus biological stability of immediate and delayed implant placement using resonance frequency analysis
Related Experiment Video
Updated: Apr 18, 2026
An Improved Mechanical Testing Method to Assess Bone-implant Anchorage
Published on: February 10, 2014
Mark Rowan1, David Lee1, Joan Pi-Anfruns2
1Dental Student, UCLA School of Dentistry, Los Angeles, CA.
Purpose:
The purpose was to objectively measure the stability of immediately placed implants compared with implants placed at healed sites using implant stability quotient (ISQ) values obtained by resonance frequency analysis.
Materials And Methods:
Data were collected from 137 Nobel Replace Tapered Groovy Implants placed in 85 patients 19 to 93 years old. All implants were placed by the same surgeon from May 2007 to October 2011. Forty-one implants were placed immediately after extraction with MasterGraft bone grafting material and 96 were placed in healed sites with no grafting material. ISQ values obtained by the Osstell ISQ System were recorded at the time of implant placement and at a subsequent follow-up appointment (T2). T2 was split into 2- to 3-month and 4- to 6-month groups depending on when their follow-up ISQ values were obtained. Data were analyzed using simple linear regression.
Results:
Implants placed in healed sites had higher average ISQ values at implant placement compared with immediately placed implants; however, mean ISQ values in the 2 immediate implant groups exceeded the ISQ threshold of 65. Immediately placed implants in the 2- to 3-month and 4- to 6-month groups had average ISQ values of 65.60 and 68.65, respectively, whereas implants placed in healed sites had averages of 76.73 (2- to 3-month group) and 71.23 (4- to 6-month group). These differences were statistically significant (P < .05). At subsequent follow-up appointments, implants placed in healed sites had higher mean ISQ values. Implants in healed sites had ISQ averages of 79.58 (2- to 3-month group) and 77.31 (4- to 6-month group), whereas immediately placed implants had averages of 73.88 and 70.14. These differences were statistically significant (P < .05). Moreover, these mean ISQ values in immediate implants exceeded the ISQ threshold of 65.
Conclusion:
Although mean ISQ values of immediately placed implants are lower than those of delayed implants at implant placement and follow-up appointments, immediate implant mean ISQ values consistently remain higher than the clinically successful ISQ threshold of 65 throughout the osseointegration process. These results support the immediate placement of implants in extraction sockets under favorable conditions.
