Cemented versus screw-retained implant-supported single-tooth crowns: a 10-year randomised controlled trial

被引:0
作者
Vigolo, Paolo [1 ]
Mutinelli, Sabrina
Givani, Andrea
Stellini, Edoardo [1 ]
机构
[1] Univ Padua, Inst Clin Dent, Dept Clin Odontostomatol, Padua, Italy
关键词
cement-retained crowns; dental implants; screw-retained crowns; single implant-supported crowns; LONGITUDINAL CLINICAL EFFECTIVENESS; OSSEOINTEGRATED DENTAL IMPLANTS; UCLA-TYPE ABUTMENTS; IN-VITRO EVALUATION; ORAL IMPLANTS; FOLLOW-UP; RESTORATIONS; TITANIUM; REPLACEMENT; MULTICENTER;
D O I
暂无
中图分类号
R78 [口腔科学];
学科分类号
1003 ;
摘要
Purpose: The purpose of this randomised controlled trial was to compare the long-term clinical outcome of cemented and screw-retained implant-supported single-tooth crowns. Materials and methods: Eighteen consecutive patients presenting with single-tooth bilateral edentulous sites in the canine/molar region with adequate bone width, similar bone height at the implant sites, and an occlusal scheme that allowed for the establishment of identical occlusal cusp/fossa contacts were treated. Each patient received two identical implants according to a split-mouth design. One side was randomly selected to be restored with a cemented implant-supported single crown, and the other was restored with a screw-retained implant-supported single crown. Outcome measures were implant success, complications, marginal bone levels and pen-implant soft tissue health. Results: Ten years after initial loading, 2 patients moved away and were lost to follow-up. Two implants placed in the same patient failed 5 years after their insertion; the remaining 30 implants survived, resulting in a cumulative implant success rate of 93.7%. No complication occurred. The mean marginal bone resorption at 10 years after implant placement, measured on intraoral radiographs, was 1.1 +/- 0.2 mm for both types of restorations. There were no statistically significant differences between the two groups with respect to pen-implant marginal bone level at the 10-year follow-up appointment (T2) (P = 0.58); at the 4-year follow-up appointment (T1) a statistically significant difference was observed (P = 0.01), but this was not considered clinically relevant (mean difference: -0.06 mm). The status of the soft tissue around the implants remained stable over the evaluation period. No statistically significant difference was identified for the facial keratinised gingiva between the two groups at T1 (P = 0.10) or at T2 (P = 0.07). Conclusions: Within the limitations of this study, the results indicate that there was no evidence of a significant difference in the clinical behaviour of the peri-implant marginal bone or of the pen-implant soft tissues when cemented or screw-retained single-tooth implant restorations were provided.
引用
收藏
页码:355 / 364
页数:10
相关论文
共 50 条
[41]   Randomized-controlled clinical trial of customized zirconia and titanium implant abutments for single-tooth implants in canine and posterior regions: 3-year results [J].
Zembic, Anja ;
Sailer, Irena ;
Jung, Ronald Ernst ;
Haemmerle, Christoph Hans Franz .
CLINICAL ORAL IMPLANTS RESEARCH, 2009, 20 (08) :802-808
[42]   Aesthetic Outcome and Patient Perception of Immediate vs. Delayed Loading of Implant-Supported Single Crowns: A Randomized Controlled Trial [J].
Kumar, Mukesh ;
Sah, Ram Prasad ;
Kumari, Rakhi ;
Rupam, Kumari Rupam ;
Priya, Priya ;
Jha, Monalisha .
JOURNAL OF PHARMACY AND BIOALLIED SCIENCES, 2024, 16 :S446-S448
[43]   Immediate Single-Tooth Implant Placement in Bony Defects in the Esthetic Zone: A 1-Year Randomized Controlled Trial [J].
Slagter, Kirsten W. ;
Meijer, Henny J. A. ;
Bakker, Nicolaas A. ;
Vissink, Arjan ;
Raghoebar, Gerry M. .
JOURNAL OF PERIODONTOLOGY, 2016, 87 (06) :619-629
[44]   An Up-to-15-Year Comparison of the Survival and Complication Burden of Three-Unit Tooth-Supported Fixed Dental Prostheses and Implant-Supported Single Crowns [J].
Walton, Terry R. .
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF ORAL & MAXILLOFACIAL IMPLANTS, 2015, 30 (04) :851-861
[45]   Marginal changes at bone-level implants supporting fixed screw-retained partial implant prostheses with or without intermediate standardised abutments: 1-year results of a randomised controlled clinical trial [J].
Maceiras, Lucia ;
Linares, Antonio ;
Novoa, Lourdes ;
Batalla, Pilar ;
Mareque, Santiago ;
Perez, Javier ;
Blanco, Juan .
CLINICAL ORAL IMPLANTS RESEARCH, 2023, 34 (03) :263-274
[46]   Management of a Fractured Multiunit Maxillary Implant-Supported Fixed Prosthesis with Stripped Abutment Screws Using a Hybrid Cement-Retained and Screw-Retained Design: A 5-Year Follow-Up Clinical Report [J].
Al Amri, Mohammad D. .
JOURNAL OF PROSTHODONTICS-IMPLANT ESTHETIC AND RECONSTRUCTIVE DENTISTRY, 2016, 25 (04) :330-334
[47]   Clinical Evaluation of 209 All-Ceramic Single Crowns Cemented on Natural and Implant-Supported Abutments with Different Luting Agents: A 6-Year Retrospective Study [J].
Sorrentino, Roberto ;
Galasso, Luigi ;
Tete, Stefano ;
De Simone, Giorgio ;
Zarone, Fernando .
CLINICAL IMPLANT DENTISTRY AND RELATED RESEARCH, 2012, 14 (02) :184-197
[48]   Clinical Evaluation of Cement-Retained Implant-Supported CAD/CAM Monolithic Zirconia Single Crowns in Posterior Areas: Results of a 6-Year Prospective Clinical Study [J].
Sorrentino, Roberto ;
Ruggiero, Gennaro ;
Toska, Eralda ;
Leone, Renato ;
Zarone, Fernando .
PROSTHESIS, 2022, 4 (03) :383-393
[49]   Early, delayed, or late single implant placement: 10-year results from a randomized controlled clinical trial [J].
Schropp, Lars ;
Wenzel, Ann ;
Stavropoulos, Andreas .
CLINICAL ORAL IMPLANTS RESEARCH, 2014, 25 (12) :1359-1365
[50]   Papilla dimension and soft tissue level after early vs. delayed placement of single-tooth implants: 10-year results from a randomized controlled clinical trial [J].
Schropp, Lars ;
Isidor, Flemming .
CLINICAL ORAL IMPLANTS RESEARCH, 2015, 26 (03) :278-286