section name header

Evidence summaries

Interventions for Replacing Missing Teeth: 1- Versus 2-Stage Implant Placement

1- or 2-stage implant placement might possibly have similar outcomes, although the evidence is insufficient. In patients with no teeth there may be less implant failures with the 2-stage approach compared to the 1-stage implant placement. Level of evidence: "D"

A Cochrane review [Abstract] 1 included 5 studies with a total of 239 subjects comparing 1-stage implant placement with 2-stage placement. On a patient, rather than per implant basis, the meta-analyses showed no statistically significant differences for prosthesis (RR 1.87, 95% CI 0.33 to 10.40; 3 studies, n=153) and implant failures (RR 1.39, 95% CI 0.59 to 3.27; 4 studies, n=210) at 6 to 12 months. However, trends suggested less implant failures with the 2-stage (submerged) approach especially in fully edentulous patients.

Comment: The quality of evidence is downgraded by study quality (inadequate or unclear allocation concealment and lack of blinding) and by imprecise results (wide confidence intervals).

References

  • Esposito M, Grusovin MG, Chew YS, Coulthard P, Worthington HV. Interventions for replacing missing teeth: 1- versus 2-stage implant placement. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2009;(3):CD006698. [PubMed].

Primary/Secondary Keywords