ReviewHealth science reports2026
Immediate or Early vs. Delayed Loading Protocols for Two-Implant Mandibular Overdentures in Edentulous Population: A Comprehensive Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.
Review in Health science reports, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background and Aims: Edentulous patients often receive mandibular overdentures retained by dental implants; however, the optimal loading protocol (immediate/early vs. delayed loading) for minimizing marginal bone loss (MBL) remains uncertain. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to compare MBL between immediate or early loading protocols and delayed loading protocols in two-implant mandibular overdentures. Methods: This study was conducted in accordance with PRISMA guidelines. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing immediate and/or early loading with delayed loading in fully edentulous patients rehabilitated with two-implant mandibular overdentures were included. Non-randomized studies, studies involving partial edentulism, and those with insufficient sample sizes were excluded. A comprehensive search was performed in PubMed, Scopus, Embase, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, and ClinicalTrials.gov from January 1990 to April 2025. Risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane RoB 2 tool. Data were synthesized using a random-effects meta-analysis, with subgroup analyses performed according to implant type, attachment system, and surface characteristics. Results: Twenty-two randomized controlled trials involving 580 patients (296 immediate/early loading; 284 delayed loading) and 1186 implants were included in the systematic review. Of these, 13 studies provided sufficient quantitative data for inclusion in the meta-analysis. Pooled analysis demonstrated that immediate/early loading was associated with significantly lower marginal bone loss compared with delayed loading (WMD = -0.13 mm; 95% CI: -0.23 to -0.03; Conclusion: Immediate and early loading protocols demonstrate similar clinical performance to delayed loading in terms of marginal bone preservation. Although a small statistically significant difference was observed, the effect size is unlikely to be clinically meaningful. The certainty of evidence is limited, and findings should be interpreted with caution due to heterogeneity and risk of bias across included studies.
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.