ArticleJournal of Indian Society of Periodontology
Comparative evaluation of immediately loaded implants in both immediate and delayed implant placement with cone-beam computed tomography analysis.
Article in Journal of Indian Society of Periodontology. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Minimally Invasive Implant Rehabilitation in Geriatric Patients: A Comprehensive Narrative Review of Contemporary Strategies to Avoid Extensive Bone Augmentation Procedures.Geriatrics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- An Assessment of Implant Stability and Bite Force Following Early and Delayed Dental Implant Placement.Cureus · 2026Article
- Comparative evaluation of immediate versus delayed loading in dental implants.Bioinformation · 2026Article
- CBCT assessment of crestal bone changes and stability: Immediate versus delayed implant placement in grafted sites.Bioinformation · 2026Article
- Clinical and radiographic changes in immediate implant placement versus delayed implant placement: AnBioinformation · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Conventionally, dental implants were placed several months after tooth extraction. Immediate implants were placed on the same day of extraction along with the conservation of the crestal bone. Immediate loading of implant facilitates immediate prosthetic reconstruction within 48 h of implant placement. In this study, both immediate and delayed implants were loaded immediately and their peri-implant bone loss, implant stability, and the soft-tissue outcomes around the implant were evaluated. Materials and Methods: Fourteen patients were included in this study, of which seven patients were under Group A (delayed) and seven patients were under Group B (immediate). The clinical evaluation was done at baseline, 3 months, and 6 months which includes plaque scores, bleeding on probing, and probing depth. Implant stability was tested by resonance frequency analyzer (implant stability quotient), and radiological evaluation of crestal bone loss was done by cone-beam computed tomography preoperatively and after 6 months. Results: In this study, there was no statistically significant difference ( Conclusion: Delayed implants with immediate loading were superior to immediate implants with immediate loading.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.