Marginal bone loss adjacent to conventional and immediate loaded two implants supporting a ball-retained mandibular overdenture: a 3-year randomized clinical trial.

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this study was to evaluate and compare marginal bone loss and clinical outcomes of conventionally and immediately loaded two implants supporting a ball-retained mandibular overdenture.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Thirty six completely edentulous patients (22 males and 14 females) were randomly assigned into two groups. Each patient received two implants in the canine area of the mandible after a minimal flap reflection. Implants were loaded by mandibular overdentures either 3 months (conventional loading group) or the same day (immediate loading group) after implant placement. Ball attachments were used to retain all overdentures to the implants. Vertical and horizontal alveolar bone losses were evaluated in both groups 1 and 3 years after implant placement using multislice computed tomography, which allow evaluation of peri-implant buccal and lingual alveolar bone. Plaque scores, gingival scores, probing depths and periotest values (PTVs) were evaluated at 4 months (baseline), 1 and 3 years after implant placement. Clinical and radiographic evaluations were performed at distal, labial, mesial and lingual peri-implant sites.

RESULTS

After 3 years of follow-up period, the immediate loading group recorded significant vertical bone loss at distal and labial sites than the conventional loading group and no significant differences in horizontal bone loss between groups were observed. Probing depth at distal and labial sites in the immediate loading group were higher than the conventional loading group, while plaque scores, gingival scores and PTVs showed no significant differences between the two groups. A low level of positive correlation between plaque scores, gingival scores, probing depths and vertical bone loss was noted.

CONCLUSION

Immediately loaded two implants supporting a ball-retained mandibular overdenture are associated with more marginal bone resorption and increased probing depths when compared with conventionally loaded implants after 3 years. The bone resorption and probing depths at distal and labial sites are significantly higher than those at mesial and lingual sites. Clinical outcomes do not differ significantly between loading protocols.