Abstract
Data sources
PubMed, Web of Science and Cochrane Oral Health Group Trials. Register databases supplemented by hand searching a range of dental implants-related journals.
Study selection
Randomised and non-randomised studies comparing implant failure rates in any group of patients receiving dental implants being inserted in fresh extraction sockets compared to the insertion in healed sites were considered.
Data extraction and synthesis
Study quality was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa scale (NOS). Implant failure (complete loss of implant) and postoperative infection were the dichotomous outcomes measures evaluated, with marginal bone loss as a continuous outcome.
Results
Seventy-three publications were included, five were randomised controlled trials, 26 clinical controlled trials and 42 retrospective studies. The 73 studies included a total of 8241 dental implants inserted in fresh extraction sockets, with 330 failures (4.00%), and 19,410 implants inserted in healed sites, with 599 failures. A random effects meta-analysis (73 studies) found the relative risk of implant failures in fresh socket sites compared to healed sites was RR= 1.58 (95% CI; 1.27 1.95) for the maxilla only RR= 1.61 (95% CI; 0.97 2.66); mandible only RR= 2.15 (95% CI; 0.62-7.47). For implants supporting single crown restoration RR= 2.05 (95% CI; 1.36-3.11) and RR= 1.42 (95% CI; 0.71- 2.83) for those with a full arch prosthesis.
There were 31 controlled studies (CCTs) and randomised controlled studies (RCTs) that included 2021 implants inserted in fresh sockets with 96 failures (4.75%) and 2759 implants were inserted in healed sites with 49 failures (1.59%). The relative risk of implant failures in fresh socket sites compared to healed sites was RR= 2.27 (95% CI; 1.57-3.29).
Conclusions
The results of the present review should be interpreted with caution due to the presence of uncontrolled confounding factors in the included studies, most of them not randomised trials. Within the limitations of the existing investigations, the present study suggests that the insertion of dental implants in fresh extraction sockets affects the implant failure rates.
Similar content being viewed by others
Log in or create a free account to read this content
Gain free access to this article, as well as selected content from this journal and more on nature.com
or
References
Branemark PI . Introduction to osseointegration. In: Branemark PI, Zarb G, Albrektsson T, (eds) Tissue-integrated prostheses. Osseointegration in clinical dentistry. pp 11–76. Chicago, Berlin: Quintessence Publishing Co 1985.
Barzilay I . Immediate implants: their current status. Int J Prosthodont 1993; 6: 169–175.
Chen ST, Buser D . Clinical and esthetic outcomes of implants placed in postextraction sites. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2009; 24: 186–217.
Quirynen M, Van Assche N, Botticelli D, Berglundh T . How does the timing of implant placement to extraction affect outcome? Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2007; 22: 203–223.
Schropp L, Isidor F . Timing of implant placement relative to tooth extraction. J Oral Rehabil 2008; 35: 33–43.
Chrcanovic BR, Albrektsson T, Wennerberg A . Dental implants inserted in fresh extraction sockets versus healed sites: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Dent 2015; 43: 16–41.
Esposito M, Grusovin MG, Polyzos IP, Felice P, Worthington HV . Interventions for replacing missing teeth: dental implants in fresh extraction sockets (immediate, immediate-delayed and delayed implants). Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2010 8; (9):CD005968.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Additional information
Address for correspondence: Bruno Ramos Chrcanovic, Department of Prosthodontics, Faculty of Odontology, Malmö University, Carl Gustafs väg 34, SE-205 06, Malmö, Sweden. E-mail: bruno.chrcanovic@mah.se; brunochrcanovic@hotmail.com
Chrcanovic BR, Albrektsson T, Wennerberg A. Dental implants inserted in fresh extraction sockets versus healed sites: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Dent 2015; 43: 16–41.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Khouly, I., Keenan, A. Review suggests higher failure rates for dental implants placed in fresh extraction sites. Evid Based Dent 16, 54–55 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1038/sj.ebd.6401098
Published:
Issue date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/sj.ebd.6401098
