z-logo
open-access-imgOpen Access
Prosthetic Complications of Screw-Retained Restoration Using Multiunit Abutments Versus Intraoral Luting on Titanium Base in Implant-Supported Complete Overdentures Randomized Clinical Trial
Author(s) -
Mostafa Saeed,
Mahmoud Elfar,
Amr Elkhadem
Publication year - 2022
Publication title -
open access macedonian journal of medical sciences
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.288
H-Index - 17
ISSN - 1857-9655
DOI - 10.3889/oamjms.2022.7662
Subject(s) - medicine , prosthesis , dentistry , abutment , dental prosthesis , implant , dental abutments , titanium , orthodontics , surgery , materials science , civil engineering , engineering , metallurgy
BACKGROUND: This trial aims to study the difference between prostheses screwmented on full-arch implants using the intraoral luting cement technique on titanium bases versus transmucosal abutments in terms of prosthetic complications.MATERIALS AND METHODS: Twenty patients were recruited in this trial, there were mainly two groups. A screw-retained full-arch implant-supported prosthesis was constructed over four dental implants on upper or lower jaws. For the control group, multiunit abutments were used to construct a screw-retained prosthesis. As for the experimental group, Ti-base abutments were used over the dental implants to construct a screw-retained prosthesis. In both groups, the prosthetic framework was made using polyether ether ketone (PEEK) material and luted intraorally over the titanium sleeve using resin cement. A binary outcome of prosthetic complication was taken in 6 and 12 months. Abutment screw loosening, prosthetic screw loosening, prosthetic screw fracture, abutment screw fracture, veneer fracture, framework fracture, Ti-base decementation, and overall prosthetic loosening were the prosthetic complications included in the trial.RESULTS: At the end of the study, a total of 19 patients adhered to the trial. Throughout the exposure process of implants, two implants failed in one patient from the Ti-base group. This patient was excluded from the study on his request. There was no statistically significant difference present between Ti-base and multiunit abutment groups in terms of abutment and prosthetic screw loosening, abutment and prosthetic screw fracture, veneer and framework fracture, Ti-base decementation, and overall prosthesis loosening for 6 and 12 months. Data were explored for normality using Kolmogorov–Smirnov and Shapiro–Wilk tests, data showed non-parametric (not-normal) distribution. Qualitative data were presented as frequencies and percentages. Wilcoxon and Mann–Whitney tests were used to compare the qualitative outcomes in this study.CONCLUSION: Both multiunit and Ti-base are considered a viable line of treatment to construct a screw-retained full arch implant-supported prosthesis.

The content you want is available to Zendy users.

Already have an account? Click here to sign in.
Having issues? You can contact us here
Accelerating Research

Address

John Eccles House
Robert Robinson Avenue,
Oxford Science Park, Oxford
OX4 4GP, United Kingdom