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

Monolithic Hybrid Abutment Crowns (Screw-Retained) Versus Monolithic Hybrid Abutments With Monolithic Crowns (Adhesively Cemented): Three-Year Data of a Prospective Clinical Split-Mouth Study

OBJECTIVES

This study compares the restoration of single-tooth implants with screw-retained lithium-disilicate hybrid-abutment crowns and single-tooth lithium-disilicate crowns adhesively bonded to hybrid abutments with regard to objective clinical and subjective patient-specific evaluation criteria over a time of observation of 3 years.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Two bone-level implants were placed in contralateral sides of the same jaw in 10 patients, each with two single-tooth gaps. After osseointegration, implants were uncovered and an impression was taken. In accordance with the split-mouth design, one implant in each patient was restored with a screw-retained hybrid abutment crown and the other implant with a hybrid abutment and an adhesively bonded single-tooth crown. The restorations were randomly allocated to the implants. Prefabricated titanium bases were used. The ceramic abutments and restorations were fabricated monolithically with pressed lithium-disilicate ceramic. An objective evaluation (survival, technical, or biological complications, FIPS) by the practitioner and a subjective evaluation (satisfaction, OHIP) by the patient were carried out after 3, 6, 12, 24, and 36 months after restoration placement.

RESULTS

Both restoration types showed a survival rate of 100% after 3 years of observation. No technical or biological complications occurred. No significant difference was observed between the two types of restoration neither for objective (survival, technical or biological complications, FIPS) nor subjective (satisfaction, OHIP) evaluation criteria (p > 0.05).

CONCLUSION

No statistically significant differences were observed between screw-retained and cemented pressed lithium-disilicate restorations on bone-level implants for both objective and subjective evaluation criteria, respectively.

CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE

Monolithic hybrid-abutment crowns (screw-retained) and monolithic hybrid abutments with single-tooth crowns (cemented) made of pressed lithium disilicate can be used to successfully restore single implants.

Contemporary Rationales for Cemented Implant Restorations in the Esthetic Zone

OBJECTIVE

This article explores the ongoing relevance of cement-retained implant restorations, focusing on their contemporary rationales for their successful use. Comprehensive considerations include esthetic, positional, and occlusal factors alongside recent technological advancements designed to mitigate previous known challenges.

OVERVIEW

In certain clinical scenarios, cement-retained implant restorations offer distinct advantages such as eliminating access holes for improved esthetics, particularly for malpositioned implants. Modern advancements in materials and techniques have enhanced their predictability, safety, and overall outcomes while minimizing biological risks.

CONCLUSIONS

When performed within appropriate protocols, cement-retained implant restorations can effectively address diverse clinical challenges. Recent technical advancements further bolster their utility, supporting esthetic, technical, biomechanical, and biological outcomes in implant rehabilitation of the partially edentulous esthetic zone.

CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE

Understanding the justifications and guidelines for cement-retained implant restorations, along with recent technological advancements, enables clinicians to optimize treatment outcomes with greater flexibility while minimizing common limitations in practice.

Longevity and risk factors of CAD-CAM manufactured implant-supported all-ceramic crowns - A prospective, multi-center, practice-based cohort study

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this prospective, multi-center, practice-based cohort study was to analyze factors associated with the success of implant supported all-ceramic single-unit crowns, made by computer-aided-design/computer-aided-manufacturing (CAD-CAM).

METHODS

All-ceramic crowns placed in a private practice-based research network (Ceramic Success Analysis, AG Keramik) were analyzed. Data from 567patients with CAD-CAM implant supported all-ceramic crowns placed between 2008-2023 by 54dentists were evaluated. Firstly, all crowns with at least one follow-up control were included (n = 907). Secondly, all crowns being followed up for ≥ 5years and all failures were included (n = 151). At the latest follow-up visit, crowns were considered as successful (not failed) if they were still in function without the need for additional therapy. Multi-level Cox proportional hazards models were used to evaluate the association between a range of predictors and time of success.

RESULTS

Within a mean follow-up period (SD) of 2.5 (2)years (first scenario) and 6.2 (1.2)years (second scenario) [maximum:12years], 27crowns failed (annual failure rate [AFR]:0.74 %). The main failure types were decementation, (n = 11), fracture of the ceramic (n = 4) or Ti-Base (n = 4). In 5-year-scenario, crowns fabricated in the laboratory had 26times lower failure rate than those fabricated chairside (95 %CI:0.0-0.7;p = 0.038). Furthermore, the use of a silane (HR:0.051;95 %CI:0.0-0.5;p = 0.014) and etching of the ceramic (HR:0.053;95 %CI:0.0-0.8;p = 0.035) resulted in a significantly higher risk for failure than their non-use.

SIGNIFICANCE

For CAD-CAM manufactured implant supported all-ceramic crowns, high success rates were found in up to 12-year evaluation. Furthermore, after 5years, no patient-or implant-level factors, but operative-level factor (i.e.fabrication method, use of silane/etching) were significantly associated with failure. The study was registered in the German Clinical Trials Register (DRKS-ID: DRKS00020271).

Survey of screw-retained versus cement-retained implant restorations used in both education and private dental practices

AIMS

In the literature, it is still unclear if the decisions for selecting the type of implant crown-retaining system are based on scientific-based research or if the Universities' choices, Implant marketing trends, or finances could have a major influence on the private dentists' decisions.

OBJECTIVES

Therefore, this study aimed to evaluate the crown-retaining system (cement- or screw-retained) used in dental schools and private dental practices.

METHODS

A 13-item questionnaire was sent to Canadian dental schools (n = 10) and dental offices in London (n = 298), Canada. The questionnaire included demographic questions and questions to reveal the dentists' perspectives on prosthetic implant treatment between the two-retaining systems. Results were analyzed using descriptive statistics and multinomial logistic regression (p = 0.05).

RESULTS

Twenty-four private dentists and five dental schools responded to the survey - 62.5% of private practitioners and 60% of universities reported using both systems. A trend was observed in using screw-retained systems by dentists who graduated 5-10 years ago. Straumann, Astra, and Nobel Biocare were the private practices and dental schools' preferred implant systems. The use of platform switching for all cases was selected by 54.2% of the private practitioners and 40% of the dental schools. Resin cement was the private practice's preferred cementation method; the dental schools used glass ionomer and zinc phosphate cement. The multinomial logistic regressions showed no statistical difference between the crown-retaining system chosen and the decision factors. The laboratory technician's recommendations and cost influenced the decision-making process for private dentists. For the universities, perio-restorative outcome, implant position, survival rates, institute preferences, and evidence-based research influenced the crown-retaining system's decision-making process.  CONCLUSION: The Canadian dental schools and private practice reported using both screw- and cement-retaining systems. However, there was a difference in the selection criteria as the universities showed a tendency towards a more research-based approach in their decision, while for the private practices, the technicians' recommendations and cost played a major role in the decision process. It was noted that the implant systems preconized by the Universities were observed to be used in private practices.

Gingival fibroblast response to (hybrid) ceramic implant reconstruction surfaces is modulated by biomaterial type and surface treatment

OBJECTIVES

Surface characteristics of implant reconstructions determine the gingival fibroblast (GF) response and thus soft tissue integration (STI). However, for monolithic implant reconstructions it is unknown whether the (hybrid) ceramic biomaterial type and its surface treatment affect GF response. Therefore, this investigation examined the influence of the implant reconstruction biomaterials hybrid ceramic (HC), lithium disilicate ceramic (LS), 4 and 5 mol% yttria partially stabilized zirconiumdioxide ceramics (4/5Y-PSZ) and their surface treatment - machining, polishing or glazing - on surface characteristics and GF response.

METHODS

After characterization of surface topography and wettability by scanning electron microscopy, interferometry and contact angle measurement, the adhesion, morphology, metabolic activity and proliferation of GFs from six donors was investigated by fluorescent staining and a resazurin-based assay at days 1, 3 and 7. Titanium (Ti) served as control.

RESULTS

Biomaterial type and surface treatment affected the GF response in a topography-dependent manner. Smooth polished and glazed surfaces demonstrated enhanced GF adhesion and earlier proliferation onset compared to rough machined surfaces. Due to minor differences in surface topography of polished and glazed surfaces, however, the GF response was similar for polished and glazed HC, LS, 4- and 5Y-PSZ as well as Ti.

SIGNIFICANCE

Within the limits of the present investigation, polishing and glazing of machined HC, LS and 4/5Y-PSZ can be recommended to support STI-relevant cell functions in GF. Since the GF response on polished and glazed HC, LS, 4- and 5Y-PSZ surfaces and the Ti control was comparable, this investigation proofed equal cytocompatibility of these surfaces in vitro.

Trueness, precision, time-efficiency and cost analysis of chairside additive and subtractive versus lab-based workflows for manufacturing single crowns: An in vitro study

PURPOSE

To evaluate the trueness, precision, time efficiency, and cost of three different workflows for manufacturing single crowns (SCs).

METHODS

A plaster model with a prepared tooth (#15) was scanned with an industrial scanner, and an SC was designed in computer-assisted-design (CAD) software. Ten SCs were printed with a hybrid composite (additive chairside) and a stereolithographic (SLA) printer (Dfab®), 10 SCs were milled in lithium disilicate (subtractive chairside) using a chairside milling unit (inLab MC XL®), and 10 SCs were milled in zirconia (lab-based) using a five-axis laboratory machine (DWX-52D®). All SCs were scanned with the same scanner after polymerization/sinterization. Each scan was superimposed to the marginal area of the original CAD file to evaluate trueness: absolute average (ABS AVG), root mean square (RMS), and (90˚-10˚)/2 percentile were calculated for each group. Marginal adaptation and quality of the occlusal and interproximal contact points were also investigated by two prosthodontists on 3D printed and plaster models. Finally, the three workflows' time efficiency and costs were evaluated.

RESULTS

Additive chairside and subtractive lab-based SCs had significantly better marginal trueness than subtractive chairside SCs in all three parameters (ABS AVG, p < 0.01; RMS, p < 0.01; [90˚-10˚]/2, p < 0.01). However, the two prosthodontists found no significant differences between the three manufacturing procedures in the quality of the marginal closure (p = 0.186), interproximal (p = 0.319), and occlusal contacts (p = 0.218). Both time efficiency and cost show a trend favoring the chairside additive workflow.

CONCLUSIONS

Chairside additive technology seems to represent a valid alternative for manufacturing definitive SCs, given the high marginal trueness, precision, workflow efficiency and low costs.

STATEMENT OF CLINICAL RELEVANCE

Additive chairside manufacturing of definitive hybrid composite SCs is now possible and shows high accuracy, time efficiency, and competitive cost.

Clinical performance of implant-supported single hybrid abutment crown restoration: A systematic review and meta-analysis

PURPOSE

To investigate survival rates and technical and biological complications of one-piece screw-retained hybrid abutments in implant-supported single crowns (SCs).

STUDY SELECTION

An electronic search was performed on five databases for clinical studies involving implant-supported single hybrid abutment crowns constructed using titanium-base (Ti base) abutments, with at least 12 months of follow-up. The RoB 2, Robins-I, and JBI tools were used to assess the risk of bias for the different study types. Success, survival, and complication rates were calculated, and a meta-analysis was performed to obtain a pooled estimate. Peri-implant health parameters were extracted and analyzed.

RESULTS

22 records (20 studies) were included in this analysis. Direct comparisons between screw-retained hybrid abutment SCs and cemented SCs showed no significant differences in the 1-year survival and success rates. For SCs using a hybrid abutment crown design, their 1-year survival rate was 100% (95% CI: 100%-100%, I2 = 0.0%, P = 0.984), and a success rate of 99% (95% CI: 97%-100%, I2 = 50.3%, P = 0.023) was calculated. No confounding variables significantly affected the estimates. The individual technical complication rate was low at 1-year follow-up. The estimated incidence of all types of complications in hybrid abutment SCs is less than 1%.

CONCLUSIONS

Within the limitations of this study, implant-supported SCs using a hybrid abutment crown design showed favorable short-term clinical outcomes. Additional well-designed clinical trials with at least a 5-year observation period are required to confirm their long-term clinical performance.

Clinical performance of monolithic lithium disilicate hybrid abutment crowns over at least 3.5 years

PURPOSE

Hybrid abutment crowns (HACs) made from monolithic ceramics represent an efficient option for single restorations on implants. However, long-term data are scarce. The purpose of this clinical trial was to evaluate the survival and complication rates of CAD-CAM fabricated HACs over a time period of at least 3.5 years.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Twenty-five patients with a total of 40 HACs made of monolithic lithium disilicate ceramic bonded to a titanium base CAD-CAM abutment were retrospectively evaluated. All implants and screw-retained restorations were placed and manufactured in the same department of a university hospital. Only crowns that had been in service for more than 3.5 years were included in the study. HACs were evaluated regarding technical and biological complications. Functional Implant Prosthodontic Scores (FIPS) were obtained.

RESULTS

The mean observation time was 5.9 ± 1.4 years. Implant survival was 100%, and HAC survival was 97.5%. Over the observation period, one crown fracture was observed, necessitating refabricating of the restoration. Three minor biological complications were found. The overall mean FIPS score was 8.69 ± 1.12 points.

CONCLUSIONS

Within the limitations of this study, monolithic screw-retained HACs milled from lithium disilicate ceramics and bonded to titanium bases appeared to be a reliable treatment option over more than 3.5 years due to their low biological and technical complication rates.

Comparison of functional and esthetic outcomes in digital versus analog rehabilitation of one-piece screw-retained implant crowns placed at second stage surgery

PURPOSE

Analog and digital impressions are established procedures for restoration of single-tooth implants. In this study, single-tooth implants were restored with definitive restorations during second-stage surgery. Analog and digital workflows were compared.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Eighty single-tooth implants were examined in total. In 40 implants, an index was taken immediately after implant placement using composite resin to fabricate the final crowns (analog workflow). For the other 40 single-tooth implants, intraoral intraoperative scans were performed (digital workflow) during primary surgery. The custom-fabricated screw-retained crowns were placed during second-stage surgery. Photographs and examinations for the scores were taken at the time of the follow-up visit, 1-4 years after placement of the crowns. The number of treatment appointments required was recorded and the modified pink esthetic score (PES) was determined. Additionally, the functional implant prosthetic score (FIPS) was measured.

RESULTS

The mean PES was 12.15/14 for the digital workflow and 11.95/14 for the analog workflow. The most common deficit was incomplete papillae for both workflows. Three treatment appointments were required for both workflows: (1) Scan and/or impressions making and patient consent, (2) implant placement, and (3) second-stage surgery with crown insertion. The FIPS was 9.1/10 for the digital workflow group and 9.2/10 for the analog workflow group. Common deficits presented as missing papillae as well as open approximal contacts. The FIPS was not significantly different between workflows (p = 0.679). The PES also did not show a statistically significant difference for both workflows (p = 0.654), however, the analog workflow showed better values for the papillae (p < 0.05). A significant difference was also found in the other PES values, with the digital workflow showing better results here (p < 0.05). A chronological analysis of the results of the digital technique showed that the cases treated last had significantly better values than the cases treated first.

CONCLUSIONS

According to the results of this study, both workflows allowed placement of the definitive crowns on single-tooth implants during second-stage surgery. Both workflows were found to be equivalent in terms of esthetic results in this study, although the digital workflow demonstrated a learning curve.

Clinical evaluation and quantitative occlusal change analysis of posterior implant-supported all-ceramic crowns: A 3-year randomized controlled clinical trial

OBJECTIVES

To compare the survival and complication rates of posterior screw-retained monolithic lithium disilicate (LS2 )/veneered zirconia (ZrO2 ) single implant crowns (SICs), as well as analyze the occlusal changes observed during a 3-year follow-up period.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Thirty-three patients were included and randomly divided into two groups. The test group consisted of 17 patients who received monolithic-LS2 -SIC, while the control group consisted of 16 patients who received veneered-ZrO2 -SIC. Implant/prosthesis survival rates, technical complications, peri-implant soft tissue conditions, and quantitative occlusal changes of SIC (obtained by the intra-oral scanner and analyzed in reverse software Geomagic Control 2015) were assessed at 1- and 3-year follow-ups. Bone loss and Functional Implant Prosthodontic Score (FIPS) were evaluated at a 3-year follow-up.

RESULTS

After a 3-year follow-up period, one patient dropped out of the follow-up. No implant loss was observed. One crown was fractured, resulting in prosthesis survival rates of 93.75% for the monolithic group and 100% for the veneered group. A technical complication rate of 25% (4/16) was observed in the veneered group (p = .333). No significant differences in the marginal bone loss were observed at the 3-year follow-up (0.00 (-0.22, 0.17) mm versus 0.00 (-0.12, 0.12) mm, p = .956). The total FIPS scores for the test group were 9.0 (9.0, 9.0), while the control group received scores of 9.0 (8.0, 10.0) (p = .953). The changes in mean occlusal clearance were 0.022 ± 0.083 mm for the test and 0.034 ± 0.077 mm for the control group (at 3 years, p = .497). The changes in occlusal contact area were 1.075 ± 2.575 mm2 for the test and 1.676 ± 2.551 mm2 for the control group (at 3 years, p = .873).

CONCLUSION

After a 3-year follow-up, screw-retained monolithic LS2 and veneered ZrO2 SIC demonstrated similar survival rates. The occlusal performance of implant prostheses needs to be closely examined during follow-up, and appropriate occlusal adjustments need to be considered.

Incidence of peri-implant disease associated with cement- and screw-retained implant-supported prostheses: A systematic review and meta-analysis

STATEMENT OF PROBLEM

Implant-supported fixed dental prostheses can be cement- or screw-retained on the implant or abutment, with advantages and disadvantages for each method. Cemented prostheses have been associated with peri-implant disease because cement remnants act as a reservoir for bacteria and hinder biofilm control. However, contrasting evidence has been presented regarding this association based on studies with varying designs, and a systematic review and meta-analysis is required.

PURPOSE

The purpose of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to answer the focused question: In patients who received implant-supported prostheses, is the incidence of peri-implant diseases higher in cemented implant-supported prostheses than in screw-retained ones?

MATERIAL AND METHODS

The search was conducted using the National Library of Medicine (MEDLINE-PubMed), SCOPUS, EMBASE, and ISI Web of Science databases. Randomized clinical trials (RCTs) that assessed the incidence of peri-implant disease in cement- and screw-retained prostheses were included. Two authors independently screened the titles and abstracts, and analyzed the full texts, extracted data, and assessed the risk of bias. The findings were summarized using meta-analyses with random effects, and the level of certainty of the evidence was determined using the grading of recommendations, assessments, development, and evaluations (GRADE) approach.

RESULTS

The search yielded 4455 articles that met the inclusion criteria based on the title and/or abstract selection. A total of 6 RCTs were included for analysis. The meta-analysis revealed no significant difference between cement- and screw-retained prostheses for the risk of peri-implant mucositis (RR: 1.36, 95% CI: 0.42-4.38, P=.61). Similarly, no significant difference was observed between cement- and screw-retained prostheses for the incidence of peri-implantitis (RR: 1.00, 95% CI: 0.23-4.31, P=1.00).

CONCLUSIONS

Moderate certainty evidence suggests that cement- and screw-retained prostheses present a similar risk for peri-implant mucositis and peri-implantitis.

Clinical performance of single implant prostheses restored using titanium base abutments: A systematic review and meta-analysis

PURPOSE

The aim of this review was to evaluate the survival rates of restorations utilizing titanium base abutments (TBA) for restoring single-unit implant prostheses.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This review was conducted following the preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. The focus question was: In patients who require the restoration of a single dental implant utilizing a titanium base abutment, what are the determining factors and outcomes relating to implant prosthesis prognosis and survival? A comprehensive search of databases (PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library) was conducted on 16 April 2023 and updated on 5 May 2023. Randomized clinical trials (RCT), retrospective studies and prospective studies, reporting on the use of TBA for single implant prostheses, were reviewed. A Cochrane collaboration risk of bias assessment analysis was performed for randomized clinical studies, and the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale tool was applied for non-randomized studies. A meta-analysis was performed on clinical trials reporting on survival rates of both TBA and other abutments. Other clinical studies, reporting on TBA only, were included for descriptive statistics.

RESULTS

The search provided 1159 titles after duplicates were removed. Six RCTs were included to perform a meta-analysis and compare the survival of the TBA to other abutments [OR 0.74; 95% CI: 0.21-2.63, heterogeneity; I2 0%; p = .99]. Twenty-three prospective and retrospective studies fulfilled the criteria and were included in the meta-analysis after 12 months of function. A total of 857 single implant-supported prostheses fabricated with a TBA were included. TBA abutments have an estimate 98.6% survival rate after 1 year in function (95% CI: 97.9%-99.4%). The mean follow-up period was 31.2 ± 16.9 months.

CONCLUSIONS

Single implant prosthesis restored with titanium base abutments showed favourable short-term survival rates.

Effect of different implant angulations on the biomechanical performance of prosthetic screws in two implant-supported, screw-retained prostheses: A numerical and experimental study

STATEMENT OF PROBLEM: A mesiodistal angle frequently forms between 2 splinted implant-supported, screw-retained fixed dental prostheses (TIS-FDPs). Mechanical complications commonly occur in prosthetic screws. Studies regarding the effect of the degree of implant angulation on the biomechanical performance of prosthetic screws in TIS-FDPs are sparse.

PURPOSE

The purpose of this numerical and experimental study was to investigate the effects of different implant angulations on the biomechanical performance, including stress distribution, stability of the screw joint, and surface morphology change of the prosthetic screws in TIS-FDPs.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

TIS-FDPs were classified into 4 groups: 0, 10, 20, and 30 degrees based on the degree of mesiodistal angle between the long axes of the 2 implants. In the finite element analysis (FEA), 4 series of 3D models were constructed and loaded with simulated occlusal forces. The von Mises stresses and rotational angles of the prosthetic screws were then calculated. In the mechanical test, each group of 5 TIS-FDPs with 10 prosthetic screws was tested under 1 million loading cycles by using a universal testing machine. The removal torque values (RTVs) and the surface roughness of the prosthetic screws were measured after cyclic loading. The normality of the outcome variables was assessed by the Shapiro-Wilk test. Analysis of variance and the Kruskal-Wallis test were used for further analysis (α=.05).

RESULTS

The FEA results showed that the von Mises stresses of the prosthetic screws were concentrated in the first screw thread crest engaged with the abutment, and the maximum values of the threads and the rotation angles of the prosthetic screws increased in the 2-implant mesiodistal angulation from 0 to 30 degrees. The mechanical tests showed that the RTVs of the prosthetic screws in each group were not significantly different after 1 million loading cycles (P=.107). The surface roughness of the crest of the first 2 threads of the prosthetic screws in the 30-degree group changed significantly compared with those in the other groups.

CONCLUSIONS

When TIS-FDPs were delivered, larger angulations of the 2 splinted implants seemed to increase the stress concentrated on the crest of the first engaged thread and the rotation angles of the prosthetic screws. After 1 million loading cycles, significant surface adhesive wear was identified on the crest of the first 2 threads of the prosthetic screws in the 30-degree group compared with groups with a smaller angulation.

Effect of the Abutment Rigidity on the Wear Resistance of a Lithium Disilicate Glass Ceramic: An In Vitro Study

Lithium disilicate (LDS) glass ceramics are among the most common biomaterials in conservative dentistry and prosthodontics, and their wear behavior is of paramount clinical interest. An innovative in vitro model is presented, which employs CAD/CAM technology to simulate the periodontal ligament and alveolar bone. The model aims to evaluate the effect of the abutment rigidity on the wear resistance of the LDS glass ceramic. Two experimental groups (LDS restorations supported by dental implants, named LDS-on-Implant, or by hybrid ceramic tooth replicas with artificial periodontal ligament, named LDS-on-Tooth-Replica) and a control group (LDS-Cylinders) were compared. Fifteen samples (n = 15) were fabricated for each group and subjected to testing, with LDS antagonistic cusps opposing them over 120,000 cycles using a dual axis chewing simulator. Wear resistance was analyzed by measuring the vertical wear depth (mm) and the volume loss (mm3) on each LDS sample, as well as the linear antagonist wear (mm) on LDS cusps. Mean values were calculated for LDS-Cylinders (0.186 mm, 0.322 mm3, 0.220 mm, respectively), LDS-on-Implant (0.128 mm, 0.166 mm3, 0.199 mm, respectively), and LDS-on-Tooth-Replica (0.098 mm, 0.107 mm3, 0.172 mm, respectively) and compared using one-way-ANOVA and Tukey's tests. The level of significance was set at 0.05 in all tests. Wear facets were inspected under a scanning electron microscope. Data analysis revealed that abutment rigidity was able to significantly affect the wear pattern of LDS, which seems to be more intense on rigid implant-abutment supports compared to resilient teeth replicas with artificial periodontal ligament.

Monolithic hybrid abutment crowns (screw-retained) versus monolithic hybrid abutments with adhesively cemented monolithic crowns

OBJECTIVES

The objective of this study is to compare monolithic hybrid abutment crowns (screw-retained) versus monolithic hybrid abutments with adhesively cemented monolithic single-tooth crowns.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Twenty subjects in need of an implant-borne restoration were randomly assigned to receive either a cement-retained (CRR) or a screw-retained (SRR) implant-supported monolithic lithium disilicate (LS₂ ) reconstruction. Each patient received a titanium implant with in internal conic connection. After osseointegration and second-stage surgery, healing abutments were placed for about 10 days. The type of restoration (CRR vs. SRR) was randomly assigned, and the restorations were manufactured of monolithic LS₂ . Both types of restorations, CRR and SRR, were based on a titanium component (Ti-base) that was bonded to the abutment (CRR) or the crown (SRR). The follow-up period for all restoration was 36 months. Clinical outcome was evaluated according to Functional Implant Prosthetic Score (FIPS). Quality of live (OHIP) and patient's satisfaction were assessed using patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs). Primary endpoint was loss of restoration for any reason. Kaplan-Meier curves were constructed and log-rank testing was performed (p < .05).

RESULTS

One restoration of group CRR failed after 6 months due to loss of adhesion between Ti-base and individual abutment. No further biological or technical failures occurred. Kaplan-Meier analysis showed no significant difference between both treatment options (p = .317). There was no statistically significant difference between both types of restoration, neither for FIPS, OHIP, treatment time nor patient satisfaction (p > .05).

CONCLUSION

Monolithic hybrid abutment crowns (screw-retained) and monolithic hybrid abutment with adhesively cemented monolithic crowns using lithium disilicate showed no statistically significant difference for implant-based reconstructions in this pilot RCT setting.

Survival and prosthetic complications of monolithic ceramic implant-supported single crowns and fixed partial dentures: A systematic review with meta-analysis

STATEMENT OF PROBLEM

Monolithic ceramic implant-supported restorations have been used to rehabilitate partially edentulous patients. However, knowledge of the survival and prosthetic complications of single crowns (SCs) and fixed partial dentures (FPDs) is limited.

PURPOSE

The purpose of this systematic review with meta-analysis was to evaluate the clinical performance of monolithic ceramic implant-supported SCs and FPDs in terms of survival and prosthetic complication rates.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

The systematic review was registered on the prospective register of systematic reviews (PROSPERO) (CRD42017078568). Five electronic databases were independently searched by 2 authors for articles published until May 2022. In addition, a hand search was performed in the nonpeer-reviewed literature, specific journals, and reference lists of included articles. A single-arm meta-analysis was performed by using the R program. The risk of bias and quality were assessed using the Cochrane risk of bias tools and the Newcastle-Ottawa scale.

RESULTS

Twenty-eight studies were included in the quantitative synthesis. A total of 1298 monolithic ceramic implant-supported restorations (1116 SCs and 182 FPDs) were evaluated in 1193 participants, with a median observation time of 24 months (range: 12 to 72 months). Meta-analysis indicated the proportion of failures and prosthetic complication rates of 2% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 1% to 4%) for SCs. No difference was observed for monolithic zirconia and lithium disilicate SCs. In the FPDs, only monolithic zirconia was considered, with 1 failure reported totaling the proportion of failures of 0% (0% to 1%) and complication rates of 4% (0% to 12%). The most complications reported for both types of restorations were screw loosening, debonding, and minor chipping and were considered repairable. The included studies showed a low risk of bias and good quality.

CONCLUSIONS

The use of monolithic ceramic implant-supported SCs, independent of ceramic material, and monolithic zirconia implant-supported FPDs should be considered an effective and safe treatment option because of favorable short-term survival and low prosthetic complications. However, additional well-conducted studies with a longer-term follow-up and direct comparison between veneered restorations are recommended to reassess clinical performance.

Should the vent hole of posterior implant crowns be placed on the lateral surface? An in vitro study of the hydrodynamic feature of cement extrusion and retention ability

Although placing a vent hole on the occlusal surface of the implant crown can reduce cervical marginal cement extrusion, it has disadvantages. Transferring the hole to the buccal or lingual surface of the posterior implant crown could therefore be an alternative solution. This study investigated the effect of transferring the vent hole to the lateral side of the implant posterior crown on the hydrodynamics of excess cement extrusion and the crown’s retention ability. Specially fabricated posterior implant crowns were divided into five groups: crowns with an occlusal hole (OH), occlusal lateral hole (OLH), middle lateral hole (MLH), cervical lateral hole (CLH), and no hole (NH). Each set of implant analog-abutment-crown specimens was wrapped in a polymethylacrylate base. The base of the implant crown was divided into four 90-degree quadrants along the diagonal of the square base with a pen mark. Cement was used to bond the crowns and the abutments, and the weight of cement extrusions at the vent holes and the abutment cervical margins were calculated. The distribution of cement extrusion at the margin was photographed in each quadrant, and the areas of surface coverage of cement extrusion were compared with ImageJ software. Retentive strength was measured as the dislocation force using a universal testing machine. One-way analysis of variance was used for result analysis. The cervical marginal cement extrusions of crowns with lateral holes (OLH, MLH, and CLH) were significantly less than that of NH crowns (P<0.05), but more than that of OH crowns (P<0.05). Subgroup analysis among the lateral hole groups indicated that the higher the position of the lateral hole, the lower the weight of the cement extrusion, and the smaller the total distribution area of cement extrusion. The cement extrusion distribution area was larger in the quadrant with the hole than in those opposite and next to the hole. Retention strength comparison indicated no significant difference between crowns with NH, OH, or lateral holes. Transferring the vent hole of the posterior implant crown to the lateral side could reduce cement extrusion at the cervical margin while reducing retention strength deterioration and the esthetic drawbacks caused by occlusal hole opening.

Proximal contact loss between implant prostheses and adjacent natural teeth: a qualitative systematic review of prevalence, influencing factors and implications

Objectives

To evaluate the prevalence of proximal contact loss (PCL) between implant prostheses and natural teeth, and identify the risk factors and implications associated with PCL.

Data/sources

PubMed (MEDLINE), Google Scholar, Cochrane Library Database, Scopus, EMBASE, Open Grey, ScienceDirect, and Web of Science were electronically searched to retrieve clinical studies on PCL around implant prostheses up to September 2021.

Study selection

A total of 19 studies were eligible. The short-term studies (less than 2 years) revealed a PCL prevalence of 11–30%, the medium-term studies (2–5 years) indicated a PCL prevalence of 13–65%, and the long-term studies (more than 5 years) showed a PCL prevalence of 29–83.3%. The likely influencing factors were the duration of service and the mesial location of proximal contacts. Other factors, such as occlusion, vitality of adjacent teeth, implant location, patient age and splinting had a less obvious relation to PCL. The reported implications of PCL were food impaction and patient dissatisfaction. Bone loss, peri-implant inflammation, bleeding on probing and pocket depth had a less clear association with PCL.

Conclusions

PCL development between implant prostheses and natural teeth is frequent, inevitable and progressive. While the review identified several influencing factors and implications of PCL, future research is needed to outline the influence of prosthesis design on PCL and food impaction.

Clinical significance

Patients with implant prostheses should be informed about PCL likelihood and the risk of food impaction around implant prostheses. The proximal contact quality and its implications should be monitored during the review visits.

Mechanical Stability of Screw-Retained Monolithic and Bi-layer Posterior Hybrid Abutment Crowns after Thermomechanical Loading: An In Vitro Study

To evaluate the failure-load and survival-rate of screw-retained monolithic and bi-layered crowns bonded to titanium-bases before and after mouth-motion fatigue, 72 titanium-implants (SICvantage-max, SIC-invent-AG) were restored with three groups (n = 24) of screw-retained CAD/CAM implant-supported-single-crowns (ISSC) bonded to titanium-bases: porcelain-fused-to-metal (PFM-control), porcelain-fused-to-zirconia (PFZ-test) and monolithic LDS (LDS-test). Half of the specimens (n = 12/group) were subjected to fatigue in a chewing-simulator (1.2 million cycles, 198 N, 1.67 Hz, thermocycling 5–55 °C). All samples were exposed to single-load-to-failure without (PFM0, PFZ0, LDS0) or with fatigue (PFM1, PFZ1, LDS1). Comparisons were statistically analyzed with t-tests and regression-models and corrected for multiple-testing using the Student–Neuman–Keuls method. All PFM and LDS crowns survived fatigue exposure, whereas 16.7% of PFZ showed chipping failures. The mean failure-loads (±SD) were: PFM0: 2633 ± 389 N, PFM1: 2349 ± 578 N, PFZ0: 2152 ± 572 N, PFZ1: 1686 ± 691 N, LDS0: 2981 ± 798 N, LDS1: 2722 ± 497 N. Fatigue did not influence load to failure of any group. PFZ ISSC showed significantly lower failure-loads than monolithic-LDS regardless of artificial aging (p < 0.05). PFM ISSC showed significantly higher failure loads after fatigue than PFZ (p = 0.032). All ISSC failed in a range above physiological chewing forces. Premature chipping fractures might occur in PFZ ISSC. Monolithic-LDS ISSC showed high reliability as an all-ceramic material for screw-retained posterior hybrid-abutment-crowns.