Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jan 3, 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
A clinical and radiographical comparison of buccolingual crestal bone changes after immediate and delayed implant
Viraj Amin1, Santosh Kumar1, Surabhi Joshi1
1Department of Periodontology and Implantology, Karnavati School of Dentistry, Karnavati University, Gandhinagar, Gujarat, India.
Aim:
The study aims to clinically and radiographically compare the bucco-lingual crestal bone changes after immediate and delayed placement of implants.
Methods:
Two groups that consisted of fifty implants were considered for this study. In group A the implants were placed immediately post extraction, whereas, in group B implants placement were delayed by four to six weeks. All the implants were submerged within the alveoli confines. Bone grafts were only placed if the jumping distance was more than 1.5 mm. Barrier membrane was not placed in any of the cases. Bucco-lingual width was measured at the time of implant placement and during abutment placement after four to six weeks. Primary flap closure was ensured in all the cases.
Results:
Thirty-one implants were placed in the mandible and nineteen were placed in the maxilla. All the implants achieved osseointegration. Immediate implant group showed a mean width of 8.80 mm (SD2.280) at the time of implant placement whereas, 7.60 mm (SD 1.871) after six months. Delayed implant group showed a mean width of 8.40 mm (SD1.673) at the time of implant placement, and 7.40 mm (SD 1.658) after six months. Intragroup showed statistically significant data (P<0.05). When the intergroup comparison of group 1 and group 2 was made at implant placement day and abutment placement day, it was found to be statistically non-significant.
Conclusion:
This study suggests that circumferential defect heals on itself without any guided bone regeneration in both the groups. The data suggests that the healing in both the group were equally good. The equally good results suggest placing the implant immediately post extraction. This saves the cost, time and most importantly the need for an extra surgery.
