Immediate Placement of Implants into Infected Sites: A Systematic Review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Traditionally, before placing dental implants, the compromised teeth are removed and the extraction sockets are left to heal for several months. To preserve the alveolar bone level from the collapse caused by healing and to reduce treatment time in situations in which tooth extraction precedes implant placement, some clinicians began to install the implant immediately into the postextraction socket without waiting for the site to heal. PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to review the literature regarding treatment outcomes of immediate implant placement into sites exhibiting pathology after clinical procedures to perform the decontamination of the implant's site. The following questions were raised: Does the presence of periodontal or endodontic infection affect immediate implant placement success? What is suggested to address the infection in the socket prior to immediate placement? MATERIALS AND METHODS: An electronic search in PubMed (U.S. National Library of Medicine, Bethesda, MD, USA) was undertaken in March 2013. The titles and abstracts from these results were read to identify studies within the selection criteria. Eligibility criteria included both animal and human studies, and excluded any review and case reports articles. The publication's intervention had to have been implant placement into a site classified as having an infection (periapical, endodontic, perioendodontic, and periodontal). RESULTS: The search strategy initially yielded 706 references. Thirty-two studies were identified within the selection criteria, from which nine were case reports and review articles and were excluded. Additional hand-searching of the reference lists of selected studies yielded five additional papers. CONCLUSIONS: The high survival rate obtained in several studies supports the hypothesis that implants may be successfully osseointegrated when placed immediately after extraction of teeth presenting endodontic and periodontal lesions, provided that appropriate clinical procedures are performed before the implant surgical procedure such as meticulous cleaning, socket curettage/debridement, and chlorhexidine 0.12% rinse. However, more randomized controlled clinical trials with a longer follow-up are required to confirm this procedure as a safe treatment. Moreover, the outcome measures were not related to the type of infection; the classification of infection was often vague and varied among the studies. The benefits of antibiotic solution irrigation and systemic antibiotic administration in such conditions are not yet proved and remain unclear.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.008 | 0.034 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.008 | 0.005 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.015 | 0.016 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".