Straight and tilted implants for supporting screw-retained full-arch dental prostheses in atrophic maxillae: A 2-year prospective study
Med. oral patol. oral cir. bucal (Internet)
; 23(6): e733-3741, nov. 2018. tab
Article
in English
| IBECS
| ID: ibc-176396
Responsible library:
ES1.1
Localization: BNCS
ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND:
To evaluate, over a 2-year period, the treatment outcomes for maxillary full-arch fixed dental prostheses (FDPs) supported by a combination of both tilted and axially-placed implants and to compare the marginal bone loss (MBL) and implant survival rates (SR) between tilted and axial implants. MATERIAL ANDMETHODS:
A retrospective study has been carried out. Thirty-two patients (16 males and 16 females) treated with maxillary full-arch FDPs were included in this retrospective study. A total of 187 implants were inserted to rehabilitate the fully edentulous maxillary arches 36% of them were tilted (T group, n = 68) and the remaining 64% were axially placed (A group, n = 119). From the total, 28% of the implants (n=53) were immediately loaded with screw-retained provisional acrylic restorations, whereas 72% underwent conventional delayed prosthetic loading 6 months post-operatively. Definitive restorations were hybrid implant prostheses (metal framework covered with high-density acrylic resin) and metal-ceramic screw-retained implant prostheses, and were placed 6 months after surgery. Such definitive restorations were checked for proper function and aesthetics every three months for two years. Peri-implant marginal bone levels were assessed by digital radiographs immediately after surgery and MBL was assessed at definitive implant loading (baseline) and 2 years afterwards.RESULTS:
The 2-year implant SR were 100% for axially placed implants and 98.5% for tilted implants. No significant differences were found amongst the A and T implant groups. Marginal bone loss measured at 2 years after definitive prosthetic loading was of -0.73 ± 0.72 mm (maximum MBL of 1.43 mm) for axially positioned implants vs. -0.51 ± 0.92 mm for tilted implants (maximum bone 1.45 mm). Differences in MBL were statistically significant when comparing immediately and delayed loaded implants.CONCLUSIONS:
Based on the results of this retrospective clinical study, full-arch fixed prostheses supported by a combination of both tilted and axially placed implants may be considered a predictable and viable treatment modality for the prosthetic rehabilitation of the completely edentulous maxilla
Full text:
Available
Collection:
National databases
/
Spain
Database:
IBECS
Main subject:
Dental Implantation, Endosseous
/
Maxilla
Type of study:
Observational study
/
Prognostic study
/
Risk factors
Limits:
Female
/
Humans
/
Male
Language:
English
Journal:
Med. oral patol. oral cir. bucal (Internet)
Year:
2018
Document type:
Article
Institution/Affiliation country:
Complutense University of Madrid (UCM)/Spain
/
University of Michigan School of Dentistry/EEUU
/
University of Seville (US)/Spain