Cemented versus screw-retained posterior implant-supported single crowns: A 24-month randomized controlled clinical trial

被引:20
|
作者
Wolfart, Stefan [1 ]
Rittich, Anne [1 ]
Gross, Karin [1 ]
Hartkamp, Oliver [1 ]
von der Stueck, Annabelle [1 ]
Raith, Stefan [1 ,2 ]
Reich, Sven [1 ]
机构
[1] RWTH Univ Hosp, Dept Prosthodont & Biomat, Pauwelsstr 30, D-52074 Aachen, Germany
[2] Clin Oral & Maxillofacial Surg, Aachen, Germany
关键词
bone implant interactions; clinical research; clinical trials; material sciences; prosthodontics; soft tissue-implant interactions; CONSENSUS REPORT; RESTORATIONS; DISEASES; RECONSTRUCTIONS; ABUTMENTS; WORKSHOP;
D O I
10.1111/clr.13849
中图分类号
R78 [口腔科学];
学科分类号
1003 ;
摘要
Objectives To compare the incidence of biological and technical complications of cemented and screw-retained monolithic lithium-disilicate implant-supported posterior single crowns. Material and Methods Forty-one subjects with a total of 56 implants received randomly allocated 28 cemented and 28 screw-retained crowns. In the screw-retained group, monolithic lithium-disilicate restorations were luted to titanium bases extraorally. In the cemented group, monolithic lithium-disilicate crowns were cemented on individualized titanium abutments intraorally. All restorations were examined according to modified FDI criteria within 2 weeks of inserting the crowns (baseline) and after 12 (n = 46) and 24 (n = 43) months. Bone loss was evaluated by standardized radiographs at baseline and 12 months. Results After 12 months, the incidence of mucositis (positive bleeding on probing) was 14.2% (screw-retained) and 17.9% (cement-retained). The gingival and plaque index and a mean marginal bone loss between 0.03-0.15 mm showed no significant difference between the groups. In the cemented group, cement residues were detected at baseline at two restorations (6.9%) by radiographic examination. A complete digital workflow was realized in most cases (85.7%). At 24 months, no restoration had failed, and no chipping of the ceramic had occurred. In the screw-retained group, screw loosening occurred in one implant. In both groups, there was obvious deterioration in the quality of 32% of the occlusal and of 18% of the proximal contact points. Conclusions The type of retention mode of monolithic implant-retained lithium-disilicate posterior crowns had no influence on the biological and technical complication rate.
引用
收藏
页码:1484 / 1495
页数:12
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [31] Immediate Loading of Implant-Supported Single Crowns after Conventional and Ultrasonic Implant Site Preparation: A Multicenter Randomized Controlled Clinical Trial
    Stacchi, Claudio
    Lombardi, Teresa
    Baldi, Domenico
    Bugea, Calogero
    Rapani, Antonio
    Perinetti, Giuseppe
    Itri, Angelo
    Carpita, David
    Audenino, Guido
    Bianco, Giuseppe
    Verardi, Simone
    Carossa, Stefano
    Schierano, Gianmario
    BIOMED RESEARCH INTERNATIONAL, 2018, 2018
  • [32] Screw-retained monolithic zirconia vs. cemented porcelain-fused-to-metal implant crowns: a prospective randomized clinical trial in split-mouth design
    Weigl, Paul
    Saarepera, Kristina
    Hinrikus, Kristina
    Wu, Yanyun
    Trimpou, Georgia
    Lorenz, Jonas
    CLINICAL ORAL INVESTIGATIONS, 2019, 23 (03) : 1067 - 1075
  • [33] Screw-retained monolithic zirconia vs. cemented porcelain-fused-to-metal implant crowns: a prospective randomized clinical trial in split-mouth design
    Paul Weigl
    Kristina Saarepera
    Kristina Hinrikus
    Yanyun Wu
    Georgia Trimpou
    Jonas Lorenz
    Clinical Oral Investigations, 2019, 23 : 1067 - 1075
  • [34] Prospective Randomized Clinical Trial of Primary Molar Crowns: 24-Month Results
    Donly, Kevin J.
    Sasa, Issa
    Contreras, Claudia Isabel
    Mendez, Maria Jose Cervantes
    PEDIATRIC DENTISTRY, 2018, 40 (04) : 253 - 258
  • [35] Trueness and adaptation of screw-retained implant-supported monolithic zirconia crowns fabricated using 3-dimensional gel deposition
    Sun, Zhe
    Li, Yuan
    Zhao, Jing
    Zheng, Yuanna
    JOURNAL OF PROSTHETIC DENTISTRY, 2025, 133 (01): : 229e1 - 229e7
  • [36] Immediate Loading of Screw-Retained All-Ceramic Crowns in Immediate Versus Delayed Single Implant Placement
    Vandeweghe, Stefan
    Nicolopoulos, Costa
    Thevissen, Eric
    Jimbo, Ryo
    Wennerberg, Ann
    De Bruyn, Hugo
    INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF PROSTHODONTICS, 2013, 26 (05) : 458 - 464
  • [37] In vitro performance and fracture resistance of pressed or CAD/CAM milled ceramic implant-supported screw-retained or cemented anterior FDPs
    Zacher, Julian
    Bauer, Robert
    Krifka, Stephanie
    Rosentritt, Martin
    JOURNAL OF PROSTHODONTIC RESEARCH, 2021, 65 (02) : 208 - 212
  • [38] Early histological, microbiological, radiological, and clinical response to cemented and screw-retained all-ceramic single crowns
    Thoma, Daniel S.
    Wolleb, Karin
    Bienz, Stefan P.
    Wiedemeier, Daniel
    Hammerle, Christoph H. F.
    Sailer, Irena
    CLINICAL ORAL IMPLANTS RESEARCH, 2018, 29 (10) : 996 - 1006
  • [39] Effect of screw access channel on the fracture rate of lithium disilicate cement-retained implant-supported posterior crowns
    Khamis, Mohamed Moataz
    Zakaria, Niveen Hazem
    JOURNAL OF PROSTHETIC DENTISTRY, 2022, 127 (04): : 618 - 625
  • [40] Randomized Controlled Clinical Trial to Compare Posterior Implant-Supported Modified Monolithic Zirconia and Metal-Ceramic Single Crowns: One-Year Results
    Cheng, Chih-Wen
    Chien, Chia-Hui
    Chen, Chun-Jung
    Papaspyridakos, Panos
    JOURNAL OF PROSTHODONTICS-IMPLANT ESTHETIC AND RECONSTRUCTIVE DENTISTRY, 2019, 28 (01): : 15 - 21