Success of immediate versus standard loaded implants: a short literature review

Oral rehabilitation with implant-supported restorations has become a successful therapy resulting in high survival rate (SR). Recently, some reports have stated that submerged implants have no differences in SR compared to transmucosal implants. It was also reported that a reduction in timing of implant loading (from 12-24 weeks to 6-8 weeks) does not affect the predictability and SR of the implants. In particular, the reduction of the loading period is well accepted by the full edentulous patient, due to the functional and aesthetic problems related to denture wearing. The purpose of this report is to evaluate the SR of immediate loading implants (ILIs) compared to placing implants in native bone, with bone graft, in post-extraction sites, with the help of computer guided implant dentistry. The aim of this short review is therefore, to assess whether ILIs achieve similar clinical outcomes when compared to conventional loading protocols. As stated in preview reviews, we can affirm that there is no difference in SR at ILIs against delayed implants and with respect to placing implants in native bone, with bone graft, in post-extraction sites, with the use of computer guided implant dentistry. Keeping in mind the limitations of the present review, we can affirm that ILIs have a similar SR when compared to conventional loading protocols