Molar Implants from CBCT Planning and Placement to Survival: Scoping Review with ☸️SAIMSARA.

Name: SAIMSARA Evidence Object skin::MOLAR_IMPLANTS_PM
Creator: SAIMSARA
License: https://saimsara.com/license/

SAIMSARA

doi:10.62487/saimsara63a946a8

SAIMSARA Journal

Machine-Readable Science • ISSN 3054-3991

Molar Implants from CBCT Planning and Placement to Survival: Scoping Review with ☸️SAIMSARA.

Skin & Aesthetics

Issue 8, Volume 1, 2026

Chat with this issue

DOI: 10.62487/saimsara63a946a8

Editorial note

• Last update: 2026-06-01 12:02:02

What is this paper about

This review shows that molar implants are not simply “high-survival” procedures, but decisions shaped by CBCT anatomy, socket timing, primary stability, infection, smoking, sinus proximity, and prosthetic loading. The full read clarifies when immediate placement, digital guidance, wide-diameter implants, grafting, and molar-specific prosthetic planning may genuinely improve predictability.

Human-verified editorial review Verified by World ID proof-of-human. This editorial layer was submitted from a SAIMSARA account verified as a unique human.

Generated with SAIMSARA v4.9

Abstract: To synthesize the structured evidence on molar implants, emphasizing clinical predictability, immediate versus delayed protocols, anatomical feasibility, digital planning, risk factors, and prosthetic-biomechanical considerations relevant to molar implant treatment. The review uses 155 references and builds its evidence map from 1812 original studies with 320655 total participants/sample observations (topic-deduplicated ΣN). This scoping review indicates that molar implant therapy is broadly predictable when case selection, three-dimensional planning, primary stability, and prosthetic load control are aligned, with high survival reported in selected immediate-placement cohorts such as 99.5% at maxillary molar sites and 99.1% at mandibular molar sites. However, the evidence also highlights that anatomical constraints, infection, smoking, buccal bone dehiscence, implant diameter, and occlusal design act as decisive modifiers rather than secondary details. CBCT-based planning, guided or robotic workflows, and site-specific protocols for the mandibular second molar and posterior maxilla emerge as recurrent clinical levers supporting safer molar implant placement. The main uncertainty concerns heterogeneous outcome definitions and the mixed signals around immediate versus delayed protocols in anatomically challenging sites. Future adequately powered trials with harmonized molar-specific endpoints are needed to clarify when immediate placement, wide-diameter implants, and digital guidance offer genuine advantages over delayed, conventional approaches.

Keywords: Molar implants; Immediate implant placement; Mandibular molars; Maxillary molars; Extraction sockets; Marginal bone loss; Implant survival; Guided implant surgery; Zirconia restorations; Periapical periodontitis

Review Stats

Final search date and database lock: 2026-05-22 20:18:21 CEST
Plan: Pro (expanded craft tokens; source: PubMed)
Source: PubMed
Total Abstracts/Papers: 3064
Downloaded Abstracts/Papers: 3064
Included original and non-original Abstracts/Papers (all): 1867
Included original Abstracts/Papers (Vote counting by direction of effect): 1812
Reference Index (links used in paper): 155
Total participants/sample observations (topic deduplicated ΣN): 320655

Get access to the full paper

Unlock the full evidence map

Full paper access includes the complete human-readable review, figures, reference index, PDF export, and machine-readable Evidence JSON download.
Evidence JSON can also be purchased separately if you only need the LLM-ready object for agent, AI, or RAG workflows.
Institutional or library access? Sign in with your institution email to open all available SAIMSARA papers under your institution access arrangement.
Need a SAIMSARA review on your own topic? ☸️Request.

Reference Index (154)

[1] Immediate implant placement in molar extraction sockets: a systematic review and meta-analysis. — https://doi.org/10.1186/s40729-020-00235-5
[2] Immediate implant placement in single mandibular molar with chronic periapical periodontitis. — https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jormas.2023.101545
[3] Feasibility of implant placement in healed mandibular molar sites: A retrospective cone beam computed tomography study. — https://doi.org/10.1016/j.prosdent.2024.02.002
[4] A Systematic Review of Outcomes Following Immediate Molar Implant Placement Based on Recently Published Studies. — https://doi.org/10.1111/cid.12390
[5] Full-Zirconia Single Molar Implant-Supported Restorations With Angulated Screw Channel Abutments: 5-Year Results of a Prospective Case Series Study. — https://doi.org/10.1111/cid.70068
[6] Guidance and rationale for the immediate implant placement in the maxillary molar. — https://doi.org/10.5125/jkaoms.2023.49.1.30
[7] Accuracy of open-sleeved vs. closed-sleeved static computer-assisted implant systems in immediate maxillary molar implant placement: An in vitro study. — https://doi.org/10.1111/clr.14265
[8] Early versus conventional loading for fully guided immediate implant placement in molar sites: a randomized controlled clinical study. — https://doi.org/10.1186/s40729-025-00624-8

Unlock the full paper to view the complete Reference Index.