I see no reason to do immediate loading. I will do immediate placement but will not load. I am already risking alot via immediate placement, dont need to push it any more by loading.
Immediate Loading and Immediate placement are two completely different issues in my mind.
I think everything has its place. I have done immediates and immediate loading when patient demands dictate. I usual try to push the patient in the opposite direction and tell them they are risking failure.
Cross arch stabilization is key as well as minimal contact.
People are starting to move away from immediates and immediate load. Even Carl Misch is now preaching "one miracle at a time" Implants are very successful. I would still be cautious.
I personally do lot's of immediately loading probably due to the fact that patients demand fixed temporary restoration and wish to reduce treatment time.
One has to be careful not to overpush the limit that is why I do only cross arch immediate loading and in case of single teeth I would do immediate restoration without IC contacts.
Whenever possible I will add narrow diameter implants in conjugation with the definitive implants especially in grafted areas.
In cases of acute infection with supporation I will not perform immediate implantation nor immediate loading.
In my practice, I am no longer doing any immediate loading for single teeth. The only immediate loading I am doing is with full arch cases utilizing cross arch stabilization, much like what Ziv Mazor is describing.
The only true implants that are designed for immediate load are subperiosteal, blade and ramus frame. That being said the root forms that are designed for immediate load are the MIS-7, AB Titan, Nobels groovy , which is just about the same as the 7 and Titan, and the LaminOss/PhysioLock by Impladent. A root form with a machine thread design mostlikely will not cot the mustard as per immediate load. You need threads that will cut and compress bone.
My fault for not including OCO it has a good desigh for immediate loading. I have looked at it in the past, but I had a considerable investement in MIS.
In my practice there is too much risk. I rather graft and delay placement. Much more success. I like to hear from some people that do immediates and tell me of their success. My bet is they have way more failures with immediates.
There is a time and place for everything. Immediate loading can be tricky. The big issues are presence of infection, patient's biology, occlusion and the cooperation from the patient, to name a few. The list goes on. However, I do immediate place and load. The implant design, size, bone quality and patient's motivation/intelligence also play a big part of immediate loading.
My surgeons have more failures with immediates then doing it in a delayed approach. I have more esthetic restorative issues from immediates, so bottom line graft and place later.
People are starting to move away from immediates and immediate load. Even Carl Misch is now preaching "one miracle at a time" Implants are very successful. No need for immediate load.
I am not doing immediate load. Whats the point, implants are successful. Why push it. I havent meant a patient yet that isnt willing to wait a couple of months versus pushing it to get it done and fail.
Immediate load: I have a higher failure rate
I do tons of immediates but when I do immediate load. I have a 10-15% failure rate.
Its not worth it to me.
Immediate loading protocol: Read the Misch protocol
Dr. Misch has a paper on this subject. I suggest everyone read it, it should be in everyones reading list.
I immediate load very few implants these days unless it follows the Misch protocol.
Immediate Loading and Immediate placement
I see no reason to do immediate loading. I will do immediate placement but will not load. I am already risking alot via immediate placement, dont need to push it any more by loading.
Immediate Loading and Immediate placement are two completely different issues in my mind.
I have to agree with Ziv on Immediate loading
I think everything has its place. I have done immediates and immediate loading when patient demands dictate. I usual try to push the patient in the opposite direction and tell them they are risking failure.
Cross arch stabilization is key as well as minimal contact.
People are starting to move away from immediates and immediate load. Even Carl Misch is now preaching "one miracle at a time" Implants are very successful. I would still be cautious.
Immediate Loading
I personally do lot's of immediately loading probably due to the fact that patients demand fixed temporary restoration and wish to reduce treatment time.
One has to be careful not to overpush the limit that is why I do only cross arch immediate loading and in case of single teeth I would do immediate restoration without IC contacts.
Whenever possible I will add narrow diameter implants in conjugation with the definitive implants especially in grafted areas.
In cases of acute infection with supporation I will not perform immediate implantation nor immediate loading.
Immediate loading in my practice
In my practice, I am no longer doing any immediate loading for single teeth. The only immediate loading I am doing is with full arch cases utilizing cross arch stabilization, much like what Ziv Mazor is describing.
Immediate loading Implant design
The only true implants that are designed for immediate load are subperiosteal, blade and ramus frame. That being said the root forms that are designed for immediate load are the MIS-7, AB Titan, Nobels groovy , which is just about the same as the 7 and Titan, and the LaminOss/PhysioLock by Impladent. A root form with a machine thread design mostlikely will not cot the mustard as per immediate load. You need threads that will cut and compress bone.
Immediate Loading with OCO Biomedical Implants
Richard,
Have you seen OCO implants? The implant design is all about immediate loading. I have been using them for years and they work great.
Definitely a different design than most other implants. It works well for me.
https://www.ocobiomedical.com/Dental-Implant-Technology-sp-1.html
GV BLACK IMMEDIATE LOAD
My fault for not including OCO it has a good desigh for immediate loading. I have looked at it in the past, but I had a considerable investement in MIS.
Immediates and Immediate load
In my practice there is too much risk. I rather graft and delay placement. Much more success. I like to hear from some people that do immediates and tell me of their success. My bet is they have way more failures with immediates.
Risk w/ immediate load.
There is a time and place for everything. Immediate loading can be tricky. The big issues are presence of infection, patient's biology, occlusion and the cooperation from the patient, to name a few. The list goes on. However, I do immediate place and load. The implant design, size, bone quality and patient's motivation/intelligence also play a big part of immediate loading.
Immediate Implants: my team has stopped
My surgeons have more failures with immediates then doing it in a delayed approach. I have more esthetic restorative issues from immediates, so bottom line graft and place later.
Immediate load
As my experiences which is failure too much and the best reasons is you can not know which is infected that you extracted.
Immediate load: Dr. lui is correct
James you are correct, most failures I have in my practice are immediates. I shy away from immediates.
Immediate load: why risk failure
People are starting to move away from immediates and immediate load. Even Carl Misch is now preaching "one miracle at a time" Implants are very successful. No need for immediate load.
Immediate Load is it needed?????
I am not doing immediate load. Whats the point, implants are successful. Why push it. I havent meant a patient yet that isnt willing to wait a couple of months versus pushing it to get it done and fail.
Immediate Load is it needed?
Orthoking it is always better to stay on the side of caution. You are wise.