We are using cookies to implement functions like login, shopping cart or language selection for this website. Furthermore we use Google Analytics to create anonymized statistical reports of the usage which creates Cookies too. You will find more information in our privacy policy.
OK, I agree I do not want Google Analytics-Cookies
The International Journal of Oral & Maxillofacial Implants
Login:
username:

password:

Plattform:

Forgotten password?

Registration

Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 29 (2014), No. 6     19. Dec. 2014
Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 29 (2014), No. 6  (19.12.2014)

Page 1406-1411, doi:10.11607/jomi.3746, PubMed:25397803


Immediate Occlusal Loading of Full-Arch Rehabilitations: Screw-Retained Versus Cement-Retained Prosthesis. An 8-Year Clinical Evaluation
Crespi, Roberto / Capparè, Paolo / Gastaldi, Giorgio / Gherlone, Enrico Felice
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.

Keywords: fresh socket implants, immediate loading, prosthetic restoration