What question did this study set out to answer?

This study aims to evaluate the success rates and aesthetic outcomes of immediate versus delayed anterior implant placements based on primary stability.

May 14, 2026

The success rate and aesthetic outcomes of immediate anterior implant placement based on primary stability: A retrospective study.

Key Points

This study aims to evaluate the success rates and aesthetic outcomes of immediate versus delayed anterior implant placements based on primary stability.
Retrospective cohort study with 120 patients undergoing single-tooth anterior implant restoration.
Patients were split into two groups: 60 for immediate placement and 60 for delayed placement.
Clinical assessments were performed at implant insertion and 12 months post-implantation.
Immediate implant group had lower initial stability (ITV P = .003, ISQ P < .001) compared to delayed group.
Immediate placement resulted in less marginal bone loss (0.48 mm vs 0.85 mm; P < .001) and higher Pink Esthetic Score (11.47 vs 10.05; P < .001).
High patient satisfaction was noted in the immediate placement group (P = .004), along with better perception of treatment (P < .001) and fewer surgical procedures (P < .001).

Abstract

Immediate and delayed implant placements are common strategies for restoring single-tooth anterior maxillary defects. This study compared the clinical outcomes of immediate versus delayed implant placements, focusing on the impact of primary stability on success rates and aesthetic results. This retrospective cohort study included 120 patients who underwent implant restoration for a single missing maxillary anterior tooth (incisor or canine), comprising the observation group (immediate implant placement group, n = 60) and the control group (delayed implant placement group, n = 60). All patients were examined at the time of implant insertion and 12 months post-implantation. The primary outcomes assessed included insertion torque values (ITVs), initial stability quotient (ISQ), marginal bone loss, Pink Esthetic Score, patient satisfaction, and adverse events. The observation group had significantly lower primary stability at implant placement than the control group (primary ITV, P = .003; primary ISQ, P < .001), whereas no significant between-group difference was observed at 12 months (final ITV, P = .588; final ISQ, P = .589). The immediate implant placement group showed less marginal bone loss (0.48 mm vs 0.85 mm; P < .001) and a higher Pink Esthetic Score (11.47 vs 10.05; P < .001). Patient satisfaction with aesthetics (P = .004), subjective perception of treatment duration (P < .001), and the number of surgical procedures (P < .001) were higher in the observation group. Overall success rates were similar (98.33% vs 96.67%). Immediate implant placement in the maxillary anterior region can achieve long-term stability similar to that of delayed implant placement, provided that adequate primary stability is achieved. They also offer advantages in soft-tissue aesthetics and patient satisfaction, making them a reliable and patient-friendly option.

Mark Helpful

Bookmark

Relay