Immediate versus Delayed Implant placement in Diabetic Patients rehabilitated with Mandibular Overdentures – A Split mouth study

Document Type : Original Article

Authors

1 Lecturer, Prosthodontist, Department of Removable Prosthodontics Faculty of Dentistry, Modern Science and Arts University (MSA), Egypt

2 Lecturer, Prosthodontist, Department of Removable Prosthodontics, Faculty of Oral and Dental Medicine, Cairo University, Egypt.

Abstract

Purpose: This comparative controlled trial (CCT) evaluates the survival rate of implants placed
into fresh extraction sockets and compare it with implants placed in healed sites in type 2 diabetic,
completely edentulous subjects rehabilitated with mandibular implant overdentures (MIODs) following
a delayed loading protocol and opposed with conventional complete dentures.
Materials and Methods: Fourteen implants were placed in seven well-controlled diabetic
subjects as determined by Glycosylated hemoglobin (HbA1c) values before implant placement
(baseline) and throughout the follow-up period. Each patient received two implants; one implant in
healed canine site and the other was immediately inserted following the extraction of an existing
periodontally hopeless canine. The implants were uncovered approximately 3 months after placement
and restored with bar-retained overdenture. The patients were scheduled for regular follow-up
appointments and for data collection. Kaplan-Meier analysis was used to calculate implant survival
from time of prosthesis placement through 24-month follow-up period.
Results: No implant failed in the delayed placement group within the 2 years study period,
whereas in the immediate group two implants failed in two patients following the prosthetic loading
at one-year follow-up period resulting in 71.2% implant survival rate. HbA1c levels ranging from
7.4 to 8.0 percent were identified in two patients with implant failures. There was no statistically
significant difference in survival rate between immediate and delayed implants in type 2 Diabetic
subjects rehabilitated with MIOD s (P=0.141).
Conclusions: Within the limitations of this study, insufficient evidence exists to recommend
immediate implant placement in type 2 diabetic subjects rehabilitated with MIODs.
 

Keywords

Files

Share

How to cite

Statistics