Clinical Outcomes of Conventional and Immediate Placement of Dental Implants in a Group of Iranian War-wounded Patients

Statement of the Problem: In recent decades, immediate implant placement has been proposed to eliminate undesirable consequences of conventional methods of delayed placement. In addition, because of the nature of this treatment method, a higher risk of complications such as infection and also higher failures rates may be expected. Purpose: The aim of this study was to compare clinical outcomes of conventional and immediate placement of dental implants in a group of Iranian war-wounded subjects. Materials and Methods: In a cross-sectional study, a questionnaire was filled for war-wounded patients referred for dental implants to Ghazi Tabatabaei Clinic in Tehran from March ۲۰۰۰ to March ۲۰۰۷. Finally univariate and then multivariate analyses of clinical outcomes of implantation were carried out. Results: A total of ۲۷۱ implants, placed in ۴۲ patients, were assessed. In the univariate analysis only associated interventions had a significant effect (P=۰.۰۱۸) while use of grafts (P=۰.۰۷۱), method of implantation (P=۰.۰۵۴) and length of implant (P=۰.۰۵۷) had a tendency toward significant relation with clinical outcomes of implantation. Logistic regression model showed that use of graft and longer implants were independently associated with clinical failure of implantation. Conclusion: In this study with limited follow-up period ۳% of implants failed clinically, with a tendency toward higher rates for immediately placed ones. Besides, use of grafts during associated interventions was associated with higher probability of clinical failure which could show that these interventions could even worsen the clinical outcome of implantation. The finding that longer implants had higher rates of failure might be attributed to short follow-up period.