Cargando…

Cemented and screw-retained implant-supported single-tooth restorations in the molar mandibular region: A retrospective comparison study after an observation period of 1 to 4 years

Objectives: The aim of this study was to evaluate the survival and compare the appearance of different mechanical and biological complications, in screw-retained and cemented-retained single-tooth implant-supported restorations localized in the molar mandibular region, over a period of 1 to 4 years....

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Ferreiroa, Alberto, Peñarrocha-Diago, Miguel, Pradíes, Guillermo, Sola-Ruiz, María-Fernanda, Agustín-Panadero, Rubén
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Medicina Oral S.L. 2015
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4368026/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25810850
http://dx.doi.org/10.4317/jced.51708
_version_ 1782362587689648128
author Ferreiroa, Alberto
Peñarrocha-Diago, Miguel
Pradíes, Guillermo
Sola-Ruiz, María-Fernanda
Agustín-Panadero, Rubén
author_facet Ferreiroa, Alberto
Peñarrocha-Diago, Miguel
Pradíes, Guillermo
Sola-Ruiz, María-Fernanda
Agustín-Panadero, Rubén
author_sort Ferreiroa, Alberto
collection PubMed
description Objectives: The aim of this study was to evaluate the survival and compare the appearance of different mechanical and biological complications, in screw-retained and cemented-retained single-tooth implant-supported restorations localized in the molar mandibular region, over a period of 1 to 4 years. Material and Methods: A retrospective study was carried out with a total of eighty implant-supported restorations, which were placed in eighty patients for prosthetic rehabilitation of a mandibular molar. Forty patients were rehabilitated with a cemented-retained restoration and the other forty with a screw-retained restoration. The presence of the following complications was recorded for both types of prostheses: Fractures of the ceramic veneering, loosening screws, mucositis and peri-implantitis. Debonding of the restoration was analyzed in the cemented-retained restoration group. The clinical survival of crowns was analyzed with a Kaplan-Meier test and the clinical complications were compared, using a Student t test and Log-rank test. Results: 27 patients registered some complication. The average rate of complications was 37,5% for cemented-retained restorations and 30% for screw-retained restorations. The complications more common in the cemented-retained restoration were the presence of mucositis (14,87%), while in the screw-retained restorations was the loosening screw (20%). Student t test and Log-Rank test found significant differences (p=0,001) between the screw loosening and presence of mucositis. Conclusions: The cemented-retained restorations seem to prevent screw loosening, but the presence of cement seem to increase the complications around the soft tissues, however in the screw-retained restorations the presence of mucositis and peri-implantitis are lower than cemented-retained restorations. The incidence of fracture of ceramic veneering was similar in both groups. Key words:Screw-retained restorations, cemented-retained restorations, screw loosening, peri-implant diseases and fracture ceramic veneering.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4368026
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2015
publisher Medicina Oral S.L.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-43680262015-03-25 Cemented and screw-retained implant-supported single-tooth restorations in the molar mandibular region: A retrospective comparison study after an observation period of 1 to 4 years Ferreiroa, Alberto Peñarrocha-Diago, Miguel Pradíes, Guillermo Sola-Ruiz, María-Fernanda Agustín-Panadero, Rubén J Clin Exp Dent Research Objectives: The aim of this study was to evaluate the survival and compare the appearance of different mechanical and biological complications, in screw-retained and cemented-retained single-tooth implant-supported restorations localized in the molar mandibular region, over a period of 1 to 4 years. Material and Methods: A retrospective study was carried out with a total of eighty implant-supported restorations, which were placed in eighty patients for prosthetic rehabilitation of a mandibular molar. Forty patients were rehabilitated with a cemented-retained restoration and the other forty with a screw-retained restoration. The presence of the following complications was recorded for both types of prostheses: Fractures of the ceramic veneering, loosening screws, mucositis and peri-implantitis. Debonding of the restoration was analyzed in the cemented-retained restoration group. The clinical survival of crowns was analyzed with a Kaplan-Meier test and the clinical complications were compared, using a Student t test and Log-rank test. Results: 27 patients registered some complication. The average rate of complications was 37,5% for cemented-retained restorations and 30% for screw-retained restorations. The complications more common in the cemented-retained restoration were the presence of mucositis (14,87%), while in the screw-retained restorations was the loosening screw (20%). Student t test and Log-Rank test found significant differences (p=0,001) between the screw loosening and presence of mucositis. Conclusions: The cemented-retained restorations seem to prevent screw loosening, but the presence of cement seem to increase the complications around the soft tissues, however in the screw-retained restorations the presence of mucositis and peri-implantitis are lower than cemented-retained restorations. The incidence of fracture of ceramic veneering was similar in both groups. Key words:Screw-retained restorations, cemented-retained restorations, screw loosening, peri-implant diseases and fracture ceramic veneering. Medicina Oral S.L. 2015-02-01 /pmc/articles/PMC4368026/ /pubmed/25810850 http://dx.doi.org/10.4317/jced.51708 Text en Copyright: © 2015 Medicina Oral S.L. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.5/ This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Research
Ferreiroa, Alberto
Peñarrocha-Diago, Miguel
Pradíes, Guillermo
Sola-Ruiz, María-Fernanda
Agustín-Panadero, Rubén
Cemented and screw-retained implant-supported single-tooth restorations in the molar mandibular region: A retrospective comparison study after an observation period of 1 to 4 years
title Cemented and screw-retained implant-supported single-tooth restorations in the molar mandibular region: A retrospective comparison study after an observation period of 1 to 4 years
title_full Cemented and screw-retained implant-supported single-tooth restorations in the molar mandibular region: A retrospective comparison study after an observation period of 1 to 4 years
title_fullStr Cemented and screw-retained implant-supported single-tooth restorations in the molar mandibular region: A retrospective comparison study after an observation period of 1 to 4 years
title_full_unstemmed Cemented and screw-retained implant-supported single-tooth restorations in the molar mandibular region: A retrospective comparison study after an observation period of 1 to 4 years
title_short Cemented and screw-retained implant-supported single-tooth restorations in the molar mandibular region: A retrospective comparison study after an observation period of 1 to 4 years
title_sort cemented and screw-retained implant-supported single-tooth restorations in the molar mandibular region: a retrospective comparison study after an observation period of 1 to 4 years
topic Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4368026/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25810850
http://dx.doi.org/10.4317/jced.51708
work_keys_str_mv AT ferreiroaalberto cementedandscrewretainedimplantsupportedsingletoothrestorationsinthemolarmandibularregionaretrospectivecomparisonstudyafteranobservationperiodof1to4years
AT penarrochadiagomiguel cementedandscrewretainedimplantsupportedsingletoothrestorationsinthemolarmandibularregionaretrospectivecomparisonstudyafteranobservationperiodof1to4years
AT pradiesguillermo cementedandscrewretainedimplantsupportedsingletoothrestorationsinthemolarmandibularregionaretrospectivecomparisonstudyafteranobservationperiodof1to4years
AT solaruizmariafernanda cementedandscrewretainedimplantsupportedsingletoothrestorationsinthemolarmandibularregionaretrospectivecomparisonstudyafteranobservationperiodof1to4years
AT agustinpanaderoruben cementedandscrewretainedimplantsupportedsingletoothrestorationsinthemolarmandibularregionaretrospectivecomparisonstudyafteranobservationperiodof1to4years