Cargando…

Hybrid Polyetheretherketone (PEEK)–Acrylic Resin Prostheses and the All-on-4 Concept: A Full-Arch Implant-Supported Fixed Solution with 3 Years of Follow-Up

Background: The aim of this three-year prospective study was to examine the outcome of a solution for full-arch rehabilitation through a fixed implant-supported hybrid prosthesis (polyetheretherketone (PEEK)-acrylic resin) used in conjunction with the All-on-4 concept. Methods: Thirty-seven patients...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: de Araújo Nobre, Miguel, Moura Guedes, Carlos, Almeida, Ricardo, Silva, António, Sereno, Nuno
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: MDPI 2020
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7408851/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32664393
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/jcm9072187
_version_ 1783567927883071488
author de Araújo Nobre, Miguel
Moura Guedes, Carlos
Almeida, Ricardo
Silva, António
Sereno, Nuno
author_facet de Araújo Nobre, Miguel
Moura Guedes, Carlos
Almeida, Ricardo
Silva, António
Sereno, Nuno
author_sort de Araújo Nobre, Miguel
collection PubMed
description Background: The aim of this three-year prospective study was to examine the outcome of a solution for full-arch rehabilitation through a fixed implant-supported hybrid prosthesis (polyetheretherketone (PEEK)-acrylic resin) used in conjunction with the All-on-4 concept. Methods: Thirty-seven patients (29 females, 8 males), with an age range of 38 to 78 years (average: 59.8 years) were rehabilitated with 49 full-arch implant-supported prostheses (12 maxillary rehabilitations, 13 mandibular rehabilitations and 12 bimaxillary rehabilitations). The primary outcome measure was prosthetic survival. Secondary outcome measures were marginal bone loss, plaque and bleeding scores, veneer adhesion issues, biological complications, mechanical complications, and the patients’ subjective evaluation. Results: There were two patients (maxillary rehabilitations) lost to follow-up, while one patient withdrew (maxillary rehabilitation). One patient with bimaxillary rehabilitation fractured the mandibular PEEK framework, rendering a 98% prosthetic survival rate. Implant survival was 100%. Average (standard deviation) marginal bone loss at 3-years was 0.40 mm (0.73 mm). Veneer adhesion was the only technical complication (n = 8 patients), resolved for all patients. Nine patients (n = 11 prostheses) experienced mechanical complications (all resolved): fracture of acrylic resin crowns (n = 3 patients), prosthetic and abutment screw loosening (n = 4 patients and 3 patients, respectively), abutment wearing (n = 1 patient). One patient experienced a biological complication (peri-implant pathology), resolved through non-surgical therapy. A 90% satisfaction rate was registered for the patients’ subjective evaluation. Conclusions: Based on the results, the three-year outcome suggests the proposed rehabilitation solution as a legitimate treatment option, providing a potential shock-absorbing alternative that could benefit the implant biological outcome.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7408851
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2020
publisher MDPI
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-74088512020-08-13 Hybrid Polyetheretherketone (PEEK)–Acrylic Resin Prostheses and the All-on-4 Concept: A Full-Arch Implant-Supported Fixed Solution with 3 Years of Follow-Up de Araújo Nobre, Miguel Moura Guedes, Carlos Almeida, Ricardo Silva, António Sereno, Nuno J Clin Med Article Background: The aim of this three-year prospective study was to examine the outcome of a solution for full-arch rehabilitation through a fixed implant-supported hybrid prosthesis (polyetheretherketone (PEEK)-acrylic resin) used in conjunction with the All-on-4 concept. Methods: Thirty-seven patients (29 females, 8 males), with an age range of 38 to 78 years (average: 59.8 years) were rehabilitated with 49 full-arch implant-supported prostheses (12 maxillary rehabilitations, 13 mandibular rehabilitations and 12 bimaxillary rehabilitations). The primary outcome measure was prosthetic survival. Secondary outcome measures were marginal bone loss, plaque and bleeding scores, veneer adhesion issues, biological complications, mechanical complications, and the patients’ subjective evaluation. Results: There were two patients (maxillary rehabilitations) lost to follow-up, while one patient withdrew (maxillary rehabilitation). One patient with bimaxillary rehabilitation fractured the mandibular PEEK framework, rendering a 98% prosthetic survival rate. Implant survival was 100%. Average (standard deviation) marginal bone loss at 3-years was 0.40 mm (0.73 mm). Veneer adhesion was the only technical complication (n = 8 patients), resolved for all patients. Nine patients (n = 11 prostheses) experienced mechanical complications (all resolved): fracture of acrylic resin crowns (n = 3 patients), prosthetic and abutment screw loosening (n = 4 patients and 3 patients, respectively), abutment wearing (n = 1 patient). One patient experienced a biological complication (peri-implant pathology), resolved through non-surgical therapy. A 90% satisfaction rate was registered for the patients’ subjective evaluation. Conclusions: Based on the results, the three-year outcome suggests the proposed rehabilitation solution as a legitimate treatment option, providing a potential shock-absorbing alternative that could benefit the implant biological outcome. MDPI 2020-07-10 /pmc/articles/PMC7408851/ /pubmed/32664393 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/jcm9072187 Text en © 2020 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
spellingShingle Article
de Araújo Nobre, Miguel
Moura Guedes, Carlos
Almeida, Ricardo
Silva, António
Sereno, Nuno
Hybrid Polyetheretherketone (PEEK)–Acrylic Resin Prostheses and the All-on-4 Concept: A Full-Arch Implant-Supported Fixed Solution with 3 Years of Follow-Up
title Hybrid Polyetheretherketone (PEEK)–Acrylic Resin Prostheses and the All-on-4 Concept: A Full-Arch Implant-Supported Fixed Solution with 3 Years of Follow-Up
title_full Hybrid Polyetheretherketone (PEEK)–Acrylic Resin Prostheses and the All-on-4 Concept: A Full-Arch Implant-Supported Fixed Solution with 3 Years of Follow-Up
title_fullStr Hybrid Polyetheretherketone (PEEK)–Acrylic Resin Prostheses and the All-on-4 Concept: A Full-Arch Implant-Supported Fixed Solution with 3 Years of Follow-Up
title_full_unstemmed Hybrid Polyetheretherketone (PEEK)–Acrylic Resin Prostheses and the All-on-4 Concept: A Full-Arch Implant-Supported Fixed Solution with 3 Years of Follow-Up
title_short Hybrid Polyetheretherketone (PEEK)–Acrylic Resin Prostheses and the All-on-4 Concept: A Full-Arch Implant-Supported Fixed Solution with 3 Years of Follow-Up
title_sort hybrid polyetheretherketone (peek)–acrylic resin prostheses and the all-on-4 concept: a full-arch implant-supported fixed solution with 3 years of follow-up
topic Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7408851/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32664393
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/jcm9072187
work_keys_str_mv AT dearaujonobremiguel hybridpolyetheretherketonepeekacrylicresinprosthesesandtheallon4conceptafullarchimplantsupportedfixedsolutionwith3yearsoffollowup
AT mouraguedescarlos hybridpolyetheretherketonepeekacrylicresinprosthesesandtheallon4conceptafullarchimplantsupportedfixedsolutionwith3yearsoffollowup
AT almeidaricardo hybridpolyetheretherketonepeekacrylicresinprosthesesandtheallon4conceptafullarchimplantsupportedfixedsolutionwith3yearsoffollowup
AT silvaantonio hybridpolyetheretherketonepeekacrylicresinprosthesesandtheallon4conceptafullarchimplantsupportedfixedsolutionwith3yearsoffollowup
AT serenonuno hybridpolyetheretherketonepeekacrylicresinprosthesesandtheallon4conceptafullarchimplantsupportedfixedsolutionwith3yearsoffollowup