LOGIN
 
Share Page:
Back

Volume 29 , Issue 6
November/December 2014

Pages 1406–1411


Immediate Occlusal Loading of Full-Arch Rehabilitations: Screw-Retained Versus Cement-Retained Prosthesis. An 8-Year Clinical Evaluation

Roberto Crespi, MD, MS/Paolo Capparè, MD, DMD/Giorgio Gastaldi, MD, DMD/Enrico Felice Gherlone, MD, DMD


PMID: 25397803
DOI: 10.11607/jomi.3746

Purpose: The aim of this study was to evaluate the survival and success of screw-retained versus cement-retained implant restorations in immediately loaded implants at 8-year follow-up. Materials and Methods: Patients who were scheduled for full-arch ceramic prosthetic restorations were divided into two groups by randomization: in one group, prosthetic frameworks were screwed onto implants (screw-retained group, SRG), and in the second group, the frameworks were cemented on abutments (cement-retained group, CRG). Dental implants were placed both in postextraction and in healed sites. A temporary full-arch prosthesis was placed immediately after implant placement. Intraoral digital radiographic examinations (evaluating marginal bone levels) were made at baseline, 6 months, and each year after implant placement. Results: In 28 patients, 24 full arches and 192 implants were placed in the maxilla and 10 full arches and 80 implants in the mandible (17 rehabilitations in each group). After an 8-year follow-up period, a survival rate of 99.27% was reported for all implants. Within the first year after implant placement, bone loss was recorded as follows: the CRG showed mean bone levels of −1.23 ± 0.45 mm, while the SRG showed mean bone levels of −1.01 ± 0.33 mm. After a 3-year follow-up, a slight increase was found (0.30 ± 0.25 mm in CRG and 0.45 ± 0.29 mm in SRG). After that point, marginal bone levels remained stable over time, up to the 8-year follow-up. No statistically significant differences were found between groups (P > .05). Conclusion: Definitive cement- and screw-retained ceramic restorations are highly predictable, biocompatible, and esthetically pleasing, and the two groups presented no statistically significant differences in bone loss.


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 JOMI Home
Current Issue
Ahead of Print
Archive
Author Guidelines
About
Accepted Manuscripts
Submission Form
Submit
Reprints
Permission
Advertising
Quintessence Home
Terms of Use
Privacy Policy
About Us
Contact Us
Help