A 7.5-year randomized controlled clinical study comparing cemented and screw-retained one-piece zirconia-based implant-supported single crowns

被引:0
|
作者
Kraus, Riccardo D. [1 ]
Hjerppe, Jenni [1 ]
Naenni, Nadja [1 ]
Balmer, Marc [1 ]
Jung, Ronald E. [1 ]
Thoma, Daniel S. [1 ]
机构
[1] Univ Zurich, Ctr Dent Med, Clin Reconstruct Dent, Plattenstr 11, CH-8032 Zurich, Switzerland
关键词
biological complications; cemented; ceramic abutments; implant abutments; screw-retained; single crowns; technical complications; zirconia; FOLLOW-UP; ABUTMENTS; SURVIVAL; RISK; RECONSTRUCTIONS; PERFORMANCE; MUCOSITIS; DISEASES; HEALTH; EXCESS;
D O I
10.1111/clr.14346
中图分类号
R78 [口腔科学];
学科分类号
1003 ;
摘要
Objectives: To compare marginal bone levels, biological, and technical outcomes of screw-retained versus cemented all-ceramic implant-supported zirconia-based single crowns after an observation period of 7.5 years. Methods: Forty-four single implants in the esthetic zone in 44 patients (22 females, 22 males) were randomly assigned to two types of restorations: SR (screw-retained); veneered one-piece zirconia abutment and CR (cement-retained); veneered lithium disilicate crown intraorally cemented on a one-piece zirconia abutment. Patients were recalled annually up to 7.5 years and survival rates, biological, and technical parameters assessed. Results: A total of 31 patients attended the 7.5-year follow-up visit (17 SR group, 14 CR group). The survival rate on the restorative level was 77.5% (74.0% CR, 81.0% SR, p = .6399). Median marginal bone loss (MBL) values yielded -0.073 mm (-0.305; 0.238) in the CR and -0.215 mm (-0.500; 0.555) in the SR group (intergroup p = .6194). Mean bleeding on probing (BoP) values were significantly in favor of group SR with 20 +/- 17% compared to 40 +/- 22% in group CR (p = .011). The overall biological complication rate amounted to 27.5% (42.1% CR, 14.3% SR, p = .0775), whereas the technical complication rate was 32.5% (42.1% CR, 23.8% SR, p = .314). In total, CR restorations showed significantly more complications (84.2% for CR, 38.1% for SR, p = .0041). Conclusion: One-piece zirconia-based single crowns on two-piece dental implants exhibited a high rate of technical and biological complications at 7.5 years of follow-up. Cemented restorations revealed significant higher rates of bleeding on probing and total complications compared to screw-retained restorations.
引用
收藏
页数:7
相关论文
共 45 条
  • [1] Five-year randomized controlled clinical study comparing cemented and screw-retained zirconia-based implant-supported single crowns
    Kraus, Riccardo D.
    Espuelas, Catharina
    Hammerle, Christoph H. F.
    Jung, Ronald E.
    Sailer, Irena
    Thoma, Daniel S.
    CLINICAL ORAL IMPLANTS RESEARCH, 2022, 33 (05) : 537 - 547
  • [2] Clinical performance of screw-retained and cemented implant-supported zirconia single crowns: 36-month results
    Claudio Cacaci
    Friederike Cantner
    Thomas Mücke
    Peter Randelzhofer
    Jan Hajtó
    Florian Beuer
    Clinical Oral Investigations, 2017, 21 : 1953 - 1959
  • [3] Clinical performance of screw-retained and cemented implant-supported zirconia single crowns: 36-month results
    Cacaci, Claudio
    Cantner, Friederike
    Muecke, Thomas
    Randelzhofer, Peter
    Hajto, Jan
    Beuer, Florian
    CLINICAL ORAL INVESTIGATIONS, 2017, 21 (06) : 1953 - 1959
  • [4] Cemented versus screw-retained posterior implant-supported single crowns: A 24-month randomized controlled clinical trial
    Wolfart, Stefan
    Rittich, Anne
    Gross, Karin
    Hartkamp, Oliver
    von der Stueck, Annabelle
    Raith, Stefan
    Reich, Sven
    CLINICAL ORAL IMPLANTS RESEARCH, 2021, 32 (12) : 1484 - 1495
  • [5] Cemented vs screw-retained zirconia-based single implant reconstructions: A 3-year prospective randomized controlled clinical trial
    Kraus, Riccardo D.
    Epprecht, Alyssa
    Hammerle, Christoph H. F.
    Sailer, Irena
    Thoma, Daniel S.
    CLINICAL IMPLANT DENTISTRY AND RELATED RESEARCH, 2019, 21 (04) : 578 - 585
  • [6] Cemented versus screw-retained implant-supported single-tooth crowns: a 4-year prospective clinical study
    Vigolo, P
    Givani, A
    Majzoub, Z
    Cordioli, G
    INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF ORAL & MAXILLOFACIAL IMPLANTS, 2004, 19 (02) : 260 - 265
  • [7] Fracture resistance of implant-supported screw-retained zirconia-based molar restorations
    Honda, Junichi
    Komine, Futoshi
    Kamio, Shingo
    Taguchi, Kohei
    Blatz, Markus B.
    Matsumura, Hideo
    CLINICAL ORAL IMPLANTS RESEARCH, 2017, 28 (09) : 1119 - 1126
  • [8] Cemented versus screw-retained zirconia-based single-implant restorations: 5-year results of a randomized controlled clinical trial
    Lamperti, Sofia T.
    Wolleb, Karin
    Haemmerle, Christoph H. F.
    Jung, Ronald E.
    Huesler, Juerg
    Thoma, Daniel S.
    CLINICAL ORAL IMPLANTS RESEARCH, 2022, 33 (04) : 353 - 361
  • [9] Cemented versus screw-retained implant-supported single-tooth crowns: a 10-year randomised controlled trial
    Vigolo, Paolo
    Mutinelli, Sabrina
    Givani, Andrea
    Stellini, Edoardo
    EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF ORAL IMPLANTOLOGY, 2012, 5 (04) : 355 - 364
  • [10] Randomized Controlled Clinical Trial Comparing Cemented Versus Screw-Retained Single Crowns on Customized Zirconia Abutments: 3-Year Results
    Heierle, Linda
    Wolleb, Karin
    Haemmerle, Christoph H. F.
    Wiedemeier, Daniel B.
    Sailer, Irena
    Thoma, Daniel S.
    INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF PROSTHODONTICS, 2019, 32 (02) : 174 - 176