Comparative study of immediate functional loading and immediate non-functional loading of monocortical implants

Abstract

BackgroundAttempts to shorten the overall length of treatment have focused on immediate loading, subsequent to implant placement. Prosthetic rehabilitation immediately after implant placement can be either functional or non-functional in nature. There is paucity of literature on the comparative evaluation of immediate functional and immediate non-functional loading of implants. This in-vivo study was undertaken to comparatively evaluate Immediate Functional Loading and Immediate Non-Functional Loading of monocortical implants with a follow-up period of 18 months. Methods50 partially edentulous cases were selected for the study. The cases were divided into two groups. In first group (Group-1), 25 implants were subjected to immediate functional loading. In second group (Group-2), 25 implants were subjected to immediate non-functional loading. The crestal bone loss, clinical stability and degree of osseointegration of these two groups were comparatively evaluated. ResultsThe crestal bone loss in both groups was within acceptable limits. The implant stability, which is a reflection of the status of bone-to-implant interface, was comparable in both the groups at different time intervals. Although, the ISQ values in Group-2 were slightly higher than those in Group-1, the results were not statistically significant. Radiodensity indicating degree of osseointegration at different time intervals in both groups was also comparable. ConclusionBoth the IFL and INFL protocols can be undertaken satisfactorily in rehabilitation using endosseous implants; however, the main factors for success in IFL and INFL are case selection, meticulous treatment planning and the precision of technique.