[Clinical observation of screw and cement-retained implant-supported restoration of fixed bridges]

Shanghai Kou Qiang Yi Xue. 2011 Jun;20(3):296-9.
[Article in Chinese]

Abstract

Purpose: To compare the prosthetic outcome of screw- and cement-retained implant-supported restorations of the fixed bridges.

Methods: A total of 185 Straumann implants were placed in the alveolar bone of 68 partially edentulous patients from Jan. 2006 to Dec. 2007. All of them were 2 to 6 units of combination crowns with Straumann system. Then they were followed up for 3 years. In each group, the retention, influence on hard and soft tissues, passive fitting and rupture strength of the ceramic layer were evaluated. The data was analyzed with SPSS12.0 software package.

Results: There were more advantages of retention and the rupture strength of the ceramic layer in the cement-retained group, while there was less influence on the hard and soft tissues, and more facility of maintenance and reparation in the screwed-retained group. The difference between the two groups was statistically not significant (P>0.05).

Conclusions: The clinical outcomes of implant restorations are satisfactory, either screw-retained or cement-retained. Cement retention is used in 2 to 3 unit combination crowns, while screw retention is more suitable for complicated cases.

Publication types

  • Comparative Study

MeSH terms

  • Cementation
  • Crowns
  • Dental Cements
  • Dental Prosthesis Retention*
  • Dental Prosthesis, Implant-Supported*
  • Dental Restoration Failure
  • Denture, Partial, Fixed
  • Glass Ionomer Cements
  • Humans
  • Metal Ceramic Alloys

Substances

  • Dental Cements
  • Glass Ionomer Cements
  • Metal Ceramic Alloys