A New Full Digital Workflow for Fixed Prosthetic Rehabilitation of Full-Arch Edentulism Using the All-on-4 Concept.

(1) Background: Recent digital workflows are being developed for full-arch rehabilitations supported by implants with immediate function. The purpose of this case series is to describe a new digital workflow for the All-on-4 concept. (2) Methods: The patients were rehabilitated using the All-on-4 concept with a digital workflow including computerized tomography scanning, intra-oral scanning, and CAD-CAM production of the temporary prosthesis, with the 3D printing of stackable guides (base guide, implant guide, and prosthetic guide). The passive fit of the prostheses and the time to perform the rehabilitations were evaluated. (3) Results: The digital workflow allowed for predictable bone reduction, the insertion of implants with immediate function, and the connection of an implant-supported prosthesis with immediate loading. The time registered to perform the full-arch rehabilitations (implant insertion, abutment connection, prosthesis connection) was below 2 hours and 30 min. No passive fit issues were noted. (4) Conclusions: within the limitation of this case series, the digital workflow applied to the All-on-4 concept using stackable base-, implant-, and prosthetic guides constitutes a potential alternative with decreased time for the procedure without prejudice of the outcome.

The All-on-4 Concept Using Polyetheretherketone (PEEK)-Acrylic Resin Prostheses: Follow-Up Results of the Development Group at 5 Years and the Routine Group at One Year.

BACKGROUND: It is necessary to investigate the application of polymer materials in implant dentistry. The aim of this study was to examine the outcome of full-arch polyetheretherketone (PEEK)-acrylic resin implant-supported prostheses. METHODS: Seventy-six patients were rehabilitated consecutively with 100 full-arch implant-supported prostheses of PEEK-acrylic resin (a development group (DG): 37 patients with 5 years of follow-up; a routine group (RG): 39 patients with 1 year of follow-up). The primary outcome measure was prosthetic survival. Secondary outcome measures were implant survival, marginal bone loss, biological complications, prosthetic complications, veneer adhesion, plaque levels, bleeding levels, and a patient subjective evaluation (including the Oral Health Impact Profile for the RG). RESULTS: In both groups, prosthetic (DG: 93.6%; RG: 100%) and implant survival (DG: 98.9%; RG: 99.5%) were high, and marginal bone loss was low (DG: 0.54 mm; RG: 0.28 mm). The veneer adhesion rate was 28.6% of prostheses in DG (RG = 0%). Mechanical complications occurred in 49% and 11.8% of prostheses in DG and RG, respectively. Biological complications, plaque, and bleeding levels were low in both groups. The subjective patient evaluation was excellent in both groups (8.6 < DG < 8.8; 9.3 < RG < 9.5; OHIP = 1.38). CONCLUSIONS: Within the limitations of this study, PEEK can be considered a viable prosthetic alternative.

Zygomatic Implants Placed in Immediate Function through Extra-Maxillary Surgical Technique and 45 to 60 Degrees Angulated Abutments for Full-Arch Rehabilitation of Extremely Atrophic Maxillae: Short-Term Outcome of a Retrospective Cohort.

The use of new devices for the rehabilitation of the severely atrophic maxillae needs validation. We aimed to report the short-term outcome of severely atrophic jaws rehabilitated with zygomatic implants with no implant head angulation placed extramaxillary in conjunction with standard implants. Forty-four patients were consecutively included with 77 zygomatic implants (31 abutments of 45 degrees and 46 abutments of 60 degrees) and 115 standard implants. Outcome measures were prosthetic survival, implant/abutment success, complications, modified plaque index (mPLI), modified bleeding index (mBI), mucosal seal efficacy evaluation (MSEE) >4 mm, and Zygomatic implants classification level (ZICL). Two patients (4.5%) were lost to follow-up. No prosthesis was lost; one patient lost one zygomatic implant; two angulated abutments of 60 degrees needed to be replaced in one patient due to an aesthetic complaint; rendering a cumulative success rate at 2-years of 95.3% and 95.9% using patient and implant/abutment as unit of analysis, respectively. Mechanical and biological complications occurred in 13 and six patients, respectively; all resolved. The median mPLI and mBI was 1; MSEE > 4 mm occurred in 17% and 21% of patients at 1- and 2-years, respectively; ZICL1 was registered in 80% of patients. The current protocol enabled good short-term outcomes.

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 (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.

Short-term report of an ongoing prospective cohort study evaluating the outcome of full-arch implant-supported fixed hybrid polyetheretherketone-acrylic resin prostheses and the All-on-Four concept.

BACKGROUND: More research is needed on the study of new materials for fixed prosthetic implant-supported rehabilitations. PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to report the short-term outcome of full-arch implant-supported fixed hybrid polyetheretherketone (PEEK)-acrylic resin prostheses and the all-on-four concept. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This prospective cohort clinical study included 37 patients (29 women, eight men) with an average age of 60 years (range: 38-78 years) with 49 full-arch hybrid PEEK-acrylic resin prosthesis supported by implants through the all-on-four concept. Primary outcome measures were prosthetic survival. RESULTS: Two patients with two maxillary prostheses were lost to follow-up. One patient with a double full-arch rehabilitation fractured the mandibular PEEK framework, rendering a 98% prosthetic survival rate. No implants were lost. The average (SD) marginal bone remodeling after 1 year of follow-up was 0.37 mm (0.58 mm). Technical complications concerning the veneer adhesion occurred in six patients and were resolved in all patients (with exception of the patient with prosthetic failure) through the creation of mechanical retentions and changing the bonding primer. Mechanical complications occurred in three patients and five prostheses consisting in prosthetic screw loosening (n = 2 patients) and fracture of the acrylic resin teeth (the patient with a prosthetic failure). CONCLUSIONS: Within the limitations of this study, the results suggest that hybrid polymer (PEEK)-acrylic resin prostheses supported by implants for full-arch rehabilitation may represent a valid treatment option, still requiring longer-term validation.

Individual lithium disilicate crowns in a full-arch, implant-supported rehabilitation: a clinical report.

This clinical report presents the clinical outcome of a maxillary full-arch implant-supported fixed rehabilitation with lithium disilicate reinforced glass ceramic monolithic crowns opposing a mandibular metal-acrylic implant-supported fixed rehabilitation in a 62-year-old woman. Eight implants were successfully placed (four maxillary, four mandibular), and no complications occurred in the postoperative or maintenance periods. Six months after delivery, the maxillary and mandibular prostheses were found to be clinically, biologically, and mechanically stable, and the patient was satisfied with the esthetics and her ability to function. Although the present indications for the use of lithium disilicate are still restricted to tooth-borne restorations, it is possible to successfully rehabilitate edentulous patients through implant-supported fixed prostheses using lithium disilicate reinforced glass ceramic monolithic crowns.