Immediate Implant Loading in Osteoporotic Patients: Mini Review

Abu Younis, Mohammed
Abu Hantash, Ra’ed
Journal Title
Journal ISSN
Volume Title
Immediate Loading in implant treatment has gained trust and confidence among implantologists. Hence, immediate loading needs careful criteria to be considered during treatment planning. Adell, et al. [1] advocated that implant micro movement caused by functional force around the bone-implant interface during healing may lead to fibrous tissue formation rather than bone [1]. Occlusal scheme is another key factor that predicts the success rate in immediate loading. Balshi & Wolfinger [2] claimed that most of failures in their immediate loaded implant patients were due to bruxism [2]. Surgical technique is another factor. Gentle surgery, absence of heat generation and operator experience play a marvellous role in raising the success rate. It has been elucidated that a temperature over 47 °C for a minute might yield heat necrosis in the bone [3,4]. Success rate effect ranged between negative factor to positive one in relation to the placement of immediate loading in fresh extraction sites and healed ones. Chaushu, et al. [5] claimed a negative effect if implants were loaded immediately in fresh extractions sites [5]. Whereas, Jo, et al. [6] claimed a higher success rate when implants loaded immediately in fresh extraction sites [6]. Operators’ skills play a significant factor in enhancing implant treatment success. Clinicians who placed more than 50 implants will reduce the failure rate by 50% when compared with inexperienced ones [7]. Implant design plays a relevant role for yielding primary stability [8]. MalÓ, et al. [9] found no difference in success rate after 1 year between implants inserted with insertion torque ≥ 30 Ncm compared to implants inserted with torque < 30 Ncm [9]. Immediate implant loading for completely mandibular edentulous arches gained favorable clinical achievements in the long term [10]. Khan, et al. [11] claimed that platelet rich fibrin has a role in preventing bone loss during the surgical to prosthetic phase [11]. Bone diseases affect on implant osseointegration. Osteoporosis is an example; it is characterized by a decrease in bone mass, and considered a major public health concern [12]. Many authors [13-15] have advocated that mutilation of osseointegration might occur around implants in osteoporotic animal specimens. Degidi & Pittelli [16] advocated that it is possible to immediately load dental implants in an osteoporotic patient [16]. Osteoporosis is not a contraindication for implant therapy [17]. Oteoporotic patients received dental show acceptable outcomes [18].