***TASK*** the task is to summarize an input biomedical literature in six sentences 
    ***INPUT*** the input is a biomedical literature 
    ***OUTPUT*** the output is the summary of an input biomedical literature in six sentences 
    ***DOCUMENTATION*** 
    ***EXAMPLES*** 
    Input: AIM To compare the immediate restoration of single implants in the esthetic zones performed on implants placed immediately after tooth extraction or 8 weeks later ( immediate replacement vs. immediate restoration ) . METHODS Sixteen patients ( 10 women and 6 men ) with a mean age of 35 years ( ranging from 21 to 49 years old ) were treated from 2004 to 2005 for single-tooth replacement in the upper arch . The patients were r and omly divided into two groups : in the test group patients received implants placed and restored ( non-occlusal loading ) at the time of tooth extraction ; in the control group implants were placed 8 weeks after tooth extraction and immediately restored .  All the patients received tapered effect ( TE ) implants from the Straumann Dental Implant System . The following parameters were evaluated at the moment of provisional restoration ( within 48 h after implant placement ) and at the 2 years follow-up visit : marginal bone resorption , papilla index , position of the mucosal margin . The implant stability quotient was measured at the moment of implant placement and at the moment of the delivery of the definitive restoration . RESULTS No statistically significant differences were found in any of the studied parameters between the test and the control groups ( P>0.05 ) . The implant stability quotient values between the test and control groups were significant ( P<0.05 ) at the moment of implant placement but were no more significant at the loading of the definitive restoration ( P>0.05 ) . CONCLUSION The results of the present study suggest that immediate replacement without functional loading may be considered a valuable therapeutic option for selected cases of single-tooth replacement in the esthetic area when TE implants are used . Implant stability at the moment of implant placement is slightly inferior in the immediate replacement group , but it does not affect the treatment result BACKGROUND Implant single-tooth replacement with a natural appearance is a challenging and dem and ing procedure . The aim of this prospect i ve study was to identify the factors affecting the presence of an inter-proximal papilla between a tooth and an implant . METHODS Forty-six patients with a total of 46 teeth scheduled for tooth extraction and immediate implant placement into fresh sockets were included in the study .  Immediate implants were positioned after teeth removal . After 4 months of healing , the implants were restored with single crown fixed prostheses . The following parameters were assessed : ( 1 ) presence/absence of the inter-proximal papilla , ( 2 ) gingival index , ( 3 ) inter-implant-tooth distance ( ITD ) and ( 4 ) distance from the base of the contact point to the inter-dental bone ( CPB ) . A computerized analysis was performed to determine ITD and CPB values after converting perioapical radiographs to digitalized images . Statistical analyses were performed to determine the effect of ITD and CPB on the presence or absence of the inter-proximal papilla . RESULTS All the implants were restored , so that a 100 % of implant survival rate was observed after 12 months of function . Mean values were recorded for ITD and CPB parameters , respectively . When ITD was 3 - 4 mm , and CPB was 3 - 5 mm , the inter-proximal papilla was significantly present ( P<0.05 ) . CONCLUSIONS The recommended inter-proximal space dimensions are 3 - 4 mm between an implant and the adjacent tooth , and 3 - 5 mm between the base of the CPB . The interaction between the surgical and prosthetic plans represents the key factor to optimize the edentulous site for predictable anterior single-implant esthetics PURPOSE The purpose of this study was 2-fold : to determine whether there is a significant difference in the hard and soft tissue response comparing immediate with delayed implant placement after tooth removal , with immediate provisionalization , in maxillary anterior sites ; and to determine and compare the crestal bone levels as the primary endpoint variable for implants placed and immediately temporized in extraction sites , to implants placed into extraction sites after the extraction site has been grafted and healed for 4 months , all immediately restored with an anatomic provisional restoration . This aim was to be evaluated by measuring crestal bone levels on st and ardized digital radiographs of the implants , using implant threads as a monitor of magnification and a pre- extraction reference . Secondary endpoint variables include soft tissue measures compared with method . MATERIAL S AND METHODS A total of 76 patients were recruited and r and omized into treatment groups . Group 1 had a maxillary tooth ( premolar , canine , lateral or central incisor ) removed , with immediate socket grafting , followed by implant placement and provisionalization 4 months later with a single tooth . Group 2 had immediate implant placement and provisionalization . St and ardized radiograph holders were used to expose digital radiographs every 6 months from baseline to up to 2 years restored . Soft tissue measures were made from st and ardized reference points . Data collected were analyzed by a statistician to test the hypotheses . RESULTS A total of 55 patients completed their follow-up . Twenty-one patients were lost to follow-up because of implant loss ( n = 5 ) , 1 treated out of protocol because of labial  bone loss found at the time of tooth removal ( n = 1 ) , geographic relocation ( n = 11 ) , dropped for noncompliance ( n = 3 ) , or medical problems ( n = 1 ) . The analyses showed no significant differences between groups in implant integration or crestal interdental bone movement on either the implant or the adjacent tooth . The bone level on the implants did move from the baseline levels during the first 6 months but not thereafter . There were no differences ( P > .05 ) observed when comparing the interactions between groups , tooth locations , or time . There was a significant ( P < .05 ) difference in the position of the facial gingival margin with a more apical position of the facial gingival margin in the delayed group compared with the immediate group during the course of the study . CONCLUSIONS Crestal bone response to immediate or delayed placement of an implant into an extraction site in the maxillary anterior region with immediate provisionalization is similar regarding hard tissue changes . Support of the gingival margin with a provisional at the time of tooth extraction and implant placement preserved 1 mm more facial gingival margin position compared with the delayed group . The decision to use either method must consider the movement of the facial gingival margin , which , in a critical esthetic patient may require soft tissue support from a provisional restoration or similar type of anatomical healing abutment PURPOSE The aim of this study was to report a clinical comparative assessment of crestal bone level change around single implants in fresh extraction sockets in the esthetic zone of the maxilla either immediately loaded or loaded after a delay . MATERIAL S AND METHODS Forty patients were included in a prospect i ve , r and omized study . All patients required 1 tooth extraction ( ie , 1 tooth with a hopeless prognosis ) and were r and omized into either the test group or the control group . Implants were positioned immediately after tooth extraction and were loaded immediately in the test group ( 20 implants ) and after 3 months in the control group ( 20 implants ) . The implant site was prepared , with at least 4 mm of sound apical bone below the implant apex , and the coronal margin of the implant was placed at the buccal level of the bone crest . All implants were 13 mm long ; 30 implants had a diameter of 5 mm , and 10 had a diameter of 3.75 mm . Radiographic examinations were made at baseline , at 6 months , and at 24 months . To compare the mean values between test and control group , a paired t test was performed ( considered statistically significant at P < .05 ) . RESULTS After a 24-month follow-up period , a cumulative survival rate of 100 % was reported for all implants . The control group result ed in a mean mesial bone loss of 1.16 + /- 0.32 mm and a mean distal bone loss of 1.17 + /- 0.41 ( mean bone loss , 1.16 + /- 0.51 mm ) . The test group result ed in a mesial bone loss of 0.93 + /- 0.51 mm and a distal bone loss of 1.1 + /- 0.27 mm ( mean bone loss , 1.02 + /- 0.53 mm ) . No statistically significant difference between control and test groups ( P > .05 ) was found . CONCLUSION The success rate and radiographic results of immediate restorations of dental implants placed in fresh extraction sockets were comparable to those obtained in delayed loading group PURPOSE This 1-year prospect i ve study evaluated the implant success rate , peri-implant tissue response , and esthetic outcome of immediately placed and provisionalized maxillary anterior single implants .  MATERIAL S AND METHODS Thirty-five patients ( 8 men , 27 women ) with a mean age of 36.5 years ( range 18 to 65 ) were included in this study .  Thirty-five threaded , hydroxyapatite-coated implants were placed and provisionalized immediately after each failing tooth had been removed . The definitive restoration was placed 6 months later . The patients were evaluated clinical ly and radiographically at implant placement and at 3 , 6 , and 12 months after implant placement . RESULTS At 12 months , all implants remained osseointegrated . The mean marginal bone change from the time of implant placement to 12 months was -0.26 + /- 0.40 mm mesially and -0.22 + /- 0.28 mm distally . No significant differences in the Plaque Index scores were noted at different time intervals . The mean midfacial gingival level and mesial and distal papilla level changes from pretreatment to 12 months were -0.55 + /- 0.53 mm , -0.53 + /- 0.39 mm , and -0.39 + /- 0.40 mm , respectively . All patients were very satisfied with the esthetic outcome and none had noticed any changes at the gingival level . DISCUSSION Although marginal bone and gingival level changes were statistically significant from pretreatment to 12 months of follow-up , they were well within clinical expectations . CONCLUSION The results of this study suggest that favorable implant success rates , peri-implant tissue responses , and esthetic outcomes can be achieved with immediately placed and provisionalized maxillary anterior single implants PURPOSE The aim of this study was to evaluate the short-term bone level response around immediately placed and provisionally restored implants using a platform switching concept . MATERIAL S AND METHODS Twenty-two implants with a platform diameter of 5.5 mm were immediately placed in healthy maxillary sites in 22 patients . Result ant circumimplant spaces were filled with a mixture of bovine bone matrix and collagen . The implants were r and omly divided into two equal groups : 11 implants connected with 3.8-mm-diameter abutments ( test group ) and 11 with 5.5-mm-diameter ones ( control ) . Provisional crowns were adapted and adjusted for nonfunctional immediate placement on each implant and the final crowns were constructed 2 months later . Posttreatment assessment s were carried out by an independent trained observer at the time of implant placement ( baseline ) , at definitive prosthesis insertion , and every 6 months thereafter . These assessment s included periapical radiographs , pocket probing depths ( PPD ) , bleeding on probing ( BOP ) , and modified Plaque Index ( mPII ) on both implants and first proximal teeth . An image analysis software application was used to compare the bone crestal heights at the mesial and distal aspects of the implants . RESULTS The mean follow-up observation period was 25 months and all implants were judged to be successfully osseointegrated . In the test group , radiographic analysis showed an average bone reduction level of 0.30 mm ( SD = 0.16 mm ) . This mean value was statistically significantly different ( P < or = .005 ) from the average reduction in the control group ( mean = 1.19 mm , SD = 0.35 mm ) . No differences between the two groups in PPD , BOP , or mPII were found . CONCLUSION This preliminary study suggests that immediate single implant restorations in specific maxillary sites with subsequent platform switching may provide peri-implant alveolar bone-level stability The purpose of the study was to evaluate survival and peri-implant bone levels of single ,  immediately loaded post-extractive implants in the anterior maxilla 12 months after implant placement . Thirty-six consecutive patients from 3 study centers were included in the study . The concerned sites were upper premolars , canines , and incisors . For each patient the following data were recorded : reason for tooth extraction , bone quality , implant size , and final insertion torque .  Implants were placed using a flapless technique and immediately loaded with a nonoccluding temporary restoration . Final restorations were provided 4 months later . Peri-implant bone resorption was evaluated radiographically after 6 and 12 months . The average final insertion torque was 70.55 Ncm . One implant inserted in D3 quality bone with a 35-Ncm seating torque was lost . All other implants had a final insertion torque ranging between 50 and 80 Ncm . The average peri-implant bone loss was 0.437 and 0.507 mm at 6 and 12 months , respectively . All the sites maintained excellent papillae and peri-implant soft-tissue conditions . The result ing 1-year success rate was 97.2 % . Immediate nonfunctional loading of single  post-extractive implants in the anterior maxilla is a predictable treatment . And it seems that achieving high insertion torques by placing self-tapping/self-condensing implants in an underprepared osteotomy is favorable PURPOSE The aim of this prospect 
    Output:
    
Immediate placement with immediate provisionalization of dental implants in the esthetic zone results in excellent short-term treatment outcome in terms of implant survival and minimal change of peri-implant soft and hard tissue dimensions