Cargando…
Five‐year randomized controlled clinical study comparing cemented and screw‐retained zirconia‐based implant‐supported single crowns
OBJECTIVES: To compare screw‐retained and cemented all‐ceramic implant‐supported single crowns regarding biological and technical outcomes over a 5‐year observation period. MATERIALS AND METHODS: In 44 patients, 44 two‐piece dental implants were placed in single‐tooth gaps in the esthetic zone. Pati...
Autores principales: | , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
John Wiley and Sons Inc.
2022
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9313572/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35224774 http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/clr.13913 |
_version_ | 1784754112472023040 |
---|---|
author | Kraus, Riccardo D. Espuelas, Catharina Hämmerle, Christoph H. F. Jung, Ronald E. Sailer, Irena Thoma, Daniel S. |
author_facet | Kraus, Riccardo D. Espuelas, Catharina Hämmerle, Christoph H. F. Jung, Ronald E. Sailer, Irena Thoma, Daniel S. |
author_sort | Kraus, Riccardo D. |
collection | PubMed |
description | OBJECTIVES: To compare screw‐retained and cemented all‐ceramic implant‐supported single crowns regarding biological and technical outcomes over a 5‐year observation period. MATERIALS AND METHODS: In 44 patients, 44 two‐piece dental implants were placed in single‐tooth gaps in the esthetic zone. Patients randomly received a screw‐retained (SR) or cemented (CR) all‐ceramic single crown and were then re‐examined annually up to 5 years. Outcome measures included: clinical, biological, technical, and radiographic parameters. Data were statistically analyzed with Wilcoxon–Mann–Whitney, Wilcoxon, and Fisher's exact tests. RESULTS: During the observation period, three patients (6.8%) were loss to follow‐up. Eight restorations (18.2%, CI (8.2%, 32.7%)) were lost due to technical (6 patients, 13.6% (CI (5.2%, 27.4%)), 2 CR and 4 SR group, intergroup p = .673; implants still present) or biological complications (2 patients, 4.5% (CI (0.6%, 16.5%)), only CR group, intergroup p = .201, both implants lost). This resulted in a survival rate of 81.2% (CI (65.9%, 90.1%)) on the restorative level (18 SR; 15 CR, 3 lost to follow‐up). At the 5‐year follow‐up, the median marginal bone levels were located slightly apical relative to the implant shoulder with 0.4 mm (0.5; 0.3) (SR) and 0.4 mm (0.8; 0.3) (CR) (intergroup p = .582). Cemented restorations demonstrated a significantly higher biological complication rate (36.8%, SR: 0.0%; intergroup p = .0022), as well as a significantly higher overall complication rate (68.4%, SR: 22.7%, intergroup p = .0049). All other outcomes did not differ significantly between the two groups (p > .05). CONCLUSIONS: All‐ceramic single‐tooth restorations on two‐piece dental implants resulted in a relatively low survival rate. Cemented restorations were associated with a higher biological and overall complication rate than screw‐retained restorations. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-9313572 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2022 |
publisher | John Wiley and Sons Inc. |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-93135722022-07-30 Five‐year randomized controlled clinical study comparing cemented and screw‐retained zirconia‐based implant‐supported single crowns Kraus, Riccardo D. Espuelas, Catharina Hämmerle, Christoph H. F. Jung, Ronald E. Sailer, Irena Thoma, Daniel S. Clin Oral Implants Res Original Articles OBJECTIVES: To compare screw‐retained and cemented all‐ceramic implant‐supported single crowns regarding biological and technical outcomes over a 5‐year observation period. MATERIALS AND METHODS: In 44 patients, 44 two‐piece dental implants were placed in single‐tooth gaps in the esthetic zone. Patients randomly received a screw‐retained (SR) or cemented (CR) all‐ceramic single crown and were then re‐examined annually up to 5 years. Outcome measures included: clinical, biological, technical, and radiographic parameters. Data were statistically analyzed with Wilcoxon–Mann–Whitney, Wilcoxon, and Fisher's exact tests. RESULTS: During the observation period, three patients (6.8%) were loss to follow‐up. Eight restorations (18.2%, CI (8.2%, 32.7%)) were lost due to technical (6 patients, 13.6% (CI (5.2%, 27.4%)), 2 CR and 4 SR group, intergroup p = .673; implants still present) or biological complications (2 patients, 4.5% (CI (0.6%, 16.5%)), only CR group, intergroup p = .201, both implants lost). This resulted in a survival rate of 81.2% (CI (65.9%, 90.1%)) on the restorative level (18 SR; 15 CR, 3 lost to follow‐up). At the 5‐year follow‐up, the median marginal bone levels were located slightly apical relative to the implant shoulder with 0.4 mm (0.5; 0.3) (SR) and 0.4 mm (0.8; 0.3) (CR) (intergroup p = .582). Cemented restorations demonstrated a significantly higher biological complication rate (36.8%, SR: 0.0%; intergroup p = .0022), as well as a significantly higher overall complication rate (68.4%, SR: 22.7%, intergroup p = .0049). All other outcomes did not differ significantly between the two groups (p > .05). CONCLUSIONS: All‐ceramic single‐tooth restorations on two‐piece dental implants resulted in a relatively low survival rate. Cemented restorations were associated with a higher biological and overall complication rate than screw‐retained restorations. John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2022-03-03 2022-05 /pmc/articles/PMC9313572/ /pubmed/35224774 http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/clr.13913 Text en © 2022 The Authors. Clinical Oral Implants Research published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/This is an open access article under the terms of the http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/) License, which permits use and distribution in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited, the use is non‐commercial and no modifications or adaptations are made. |
spellingShingle | Original Articles Kraus, Riccardo D. Espuelas, Catharina Hämmerle, Christoph H. F. Jung, Ronald E. Sailer, Irena Thoma, Daniel S. Five‐year randomized controlled clinical study comparing cemented and screw‐retained zirconia‐based implant‐supported single crowns |
title | Five‐year randomized controlled clinical study comparing cemented and screw‐retained zirconia‐based implant‐supported single crowns |
title_full | Five‐year randomized controlled clinical study comparing cemented and screw‐retained zirconia‐based implant‐supported single crowns |
title_fullStr | Five‐year randomized controlled clinical study comparing cemented and screw‐retained zirconia‐based implant‐supported single crowns |
title_full_unstemmed | Five‐year randomized controlled clinical study comparing cemented and screw‐retained zirconia‐based implant‐supported single crowns |
title_short | Five‐year randomized controlled clinical study comparing cemented and screw‐retained zirconia‐based implant‐supported single crowns |
title_sort | five‐year randomized controlled clinical study comparing cemented and screw‐retained zirconia‐based implant‐supported single crowns |
topic | Original Articles |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9313572/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35224774 http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/clr.13913 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT krausriccardod fiveyearrandomizedcontrolledclinicalstudycomparingcementedandscrewretainedzirconiabasedimplantsupportedsinglecrowns AT espuelascatharina fiveyearrandomizedcontrolledclinicalstudycomparingcementedandscrewretainedzirconiabasedimplantsupportedsinglecrowns AT hammerlechristophhf fiveyearrandomizedcontrolledclinicalstudycomparingcementedandscrewretainedzirconiabasedimplantsupportedsinglecrowns AT jungronalde fiveyearrandomizedcontrolledclinicalstudycomparingcementedandscrewretainedzirconiabasedimplantsupportedsinglecrowns AT sailerirena fiveyearrandomizedcontrolledclinicalstudycomparingcementedandscrewretainedzirconiabasedimplantsupportedsinglecrowns AT thomadaniels fiveyearrandomizedcontrolledclinicalstudycomparingcementedandscrewretainedzirconiabasedimplantsupportedsinglecrowns |