Share Page:

Volume 24 , Issue 2
March/April 2011

Pages 158–167

Implant-Level Prostheses in the Edentulous Maxilla: A Comparison with Conventional Abutment-Level Prostheses After 5 Years of Use

Lars Hjalmarsson, DDS, PhD/Jan-Ivan Smedberg, DDS, PhD/Mattias Pettersson, DDS/Torsten Jemt, DDS, PhD

PMID: 21479285

Purpose: Long-term comparisons of frameworks at the implant or abutment level are not available, and knowledge of the clinical function of cobalt-chromium (Co-Cr) alloy frameworks is limited. Primarily, the aim of this study was to compare the 5-year clinical performance of frameworks with or without abutment connections to implants. Secondly, the outcomes of prostheses made from Co-Cr alloy with porcelain veneers to those made of commercially pure titanium (CP Ti) with acrylic veneers were compared. Materials and Methods: The test groups comprised patients treated with screw-retained fixed prostheses made at the implant level according to the Cresco method in either dental porcelain–veneered Co-Cr alloy (n = 15) or acrylic-veneered CP Ti (n = 25). A control group of 40 randomly selected patients were provided with prostheses made at the standard abutment level in CP Ti with acrylic veneers. For all patients, clinical and radiologic 5-year data were retrospectively collected and evaluated. Results: Five-year implant cumulative survival rates (CSRs) were 98.6% and 97.6% for test and control groups, respectively (P > .05). No major differences in bone level were demonstrated between the groups after 5 years (P > .05). Significantly more complications occurred in the test groups compared to the control group (P < .01), with the most common complications being mucositis and fracture of veneers. Conclusions: After 5 years, the clinical outcomes of implant-level prostheses made of porcelain-veneered Co-Cr or acrylic-veneered CP Ti seem comparable to acrylic-veneered titanium prostheses made at the standard abutment level regarding implant CSR and bone levels. However, more complications were registered in implant-level prostheses compared to the standard abutment-level prostheses. Int J Prosthodont 2011;24:158–167.

Full Text PDF File | Order Article


Get Adobe Reader
Adobe Acrobat Reader is required to view PDF files. This is a free program available from the Adobe web site.
Follow the download directions on the Adobe web site to get your copy of Adobe Acrobat Reader.


© 2017 Quintessence Publishing Co, Inc

IJP Home
Current Issue
Ahead of Print
Author Guidelines
Accepted Manuscripts
Submission Form
Quintessence Home
Terms of Use
Privacy Policy
About Us
Contact Us