need for augmentation. 6,7Therefore, early placement may offer a balanced approach between biologic safety and preservation of ridge architecture. 2,3 IntroductIonImplant placement in extraction sockets remains challenging, especially in sites with infection, deficient socket walls, or compromised hard and soft tissues.Hmmerle et al. highlighted that implant placement should be guided by biologic healing rather than convenience, a principle later reinforced by consensus recommendations. 1,2mmediate implant placement offers advantages, including shorter treatment time, fewer surgeries, and reduced postextraction tissue collapse. 3Its success, however, depends on careful case selection, thorough debridement, adequate anchorage, and precise implant positioning. 1,4,5Hence, immediate placement is often avoided when infection is severe or primary stability is not predictable.Early implant placement, typically performed 4-8 weeks after extraction following substantial soft tissue healing, has emerged as a biologically and clinically favorable alternative. 2,3It enables resolution of acute infection, soft tissue maturation, and improved implant positioning, while limiting the prolonged delay of late placement.Importantly, it also intervenes before advanced ridge remodeling occurs, which is relevant because spontaneous healing is often associated with significant horizontal and vertical bone loss that may compromise ideal implant placement and increase the
John et al. (Thu,) studied this question.