Aim: this study compared the outcome of immediate non-occlusal loading with conventional loading for single implants in the maxillary aesthetic zone. It was hypothesized that immediate non-occlusal loading is not inferior to conventional loading.
Materials and methods: sixty-two patients with a missing maxillary anterior tooth were randomly assigned to be treated with an implant that was either restored with a non-occluding temporary crown within 24 h after implant placement (the "immediate group") or was restored according to a two-stage procedure after 3 months (the "conventional group"). All implants were installed in healed sites. Follow-up visits were conducted after 6 and 18 months post-implant placement. Outcome measures were radiographic marginal bone-level changes, survival, soft tissue aspects (probing depth, plaque, bleeding, soft tissue level), aesthetics and patient satisfaction.
Results: no significant differences were found between both study groups regarding marginal bone loss (immediate group 0.91 ± 0.61 mm, conventional group 0.90 ± 0.57 mm), survival (immediate group 96.8%: one implant lost, conventional group 100%), soft tissue aspects, aesthetic outcome and patient satisfaction.
Conclusion: within the limitations of this study (sample size, follow-up duration), it was demonstrated that, for single implants in the anterior maxilla, the outcome of immediate non-occlusal loading was not less favourable than conventional loading.