Rehabilitation of edentulous jaws with zirconia complete-arch fixed implant-supported prostheses: An up to 4-year retrospective clinical study.

STATEMENT OF PROBLEM: Limited data are available on the clinical outcomes of patients with edentulism treated with zirconia complete-arch fixed implant-supported prostheses (CAFIPs). PURPOSE: The primary purpose of this retrospective clinical study was to study the failure rate of dental implants as well as the fracture rate of zirconia CAFIPs. The secondary purpose was to study the survival outcomes of patients with edentulism treated with zirconia CAFIPs as well as the rate of technical complications. MATERIAL AND METHODS: This retrospective clinical study from private practice included 128 patients rehabilitated between January 1, 2013, and December 31, 2016, with 1072 implants supporting 191 zirconia CAFIPs for single-jaw as well as double-jaw rehabilitations. All zirconia prostheses were of 1-piece design and were veneered with feldspathic porcelain only at the gingival region and therefore considered as predominantly monolithic. Additionally, all prostheses were bonded to implant manufacturer's titanium cylinders that provided an intimate contact with the implants. The primary outcome measures were implant failure rate and prosthesis fracture rate. The secondary outcome measures were prosthodontic treatment survival rate and the incidence of technical complications with respect to monolithic zirconia CAFIPs. Cumulative survival rate (CSR) for implants and prostheses was calculated after a life-table survival analysis. RESULTS: Of the analyzed samples over a 4-year period, at least 288 implants and 49 prostheses had a minimum of 4 years of follow-up. A total of 18 implant failures were noted (13 in maxilla, 5 in mandible), yielding a CSR of 97.6% for implants. One fracture of the zirconia prosthesis was recorded, yielding a CSR of 99.4% for the prostheses over the 4-year period. Another 3 prostheses required remaking because the supporting implants failed, and 1 prosthesis was remade because the lack of passive fit resulted in a CSR of 96.8% for the prosthodontic treatment itself. During the 4-year period, 1 zirconia prosthesis had a technical complication related to the debonding of titanium cylinders, and 2 prostheses had fractured screws, which were resolved successfully. No zirconia prostheses had chipping of the veneered gingival porcelain. CONCLUSIONS: Findings from this retrospective clinical study from private practice showed that prosthodontic treatment of edentulous patients with a 1-piece, complete-arch fixed implant-supported zirconia prosthesis with veneered porcelain restricted to the gingival region had high survival rates for implants and prostheses. Minimal technical complications related to this type of treatment for edentulous jaws and no chipping of the veneered gingival porcelain were encountered.

Survival of 2039 complete arch fixed implant-supported zirconia prostheses: A retrospective study.

STATEMENT OF PROBLEM: Presently, data for the survival of 1-piece complete arch fixed implant-supported zirconia prostheses are limited. PURPOSE: The purpose of this retrospective study was to evaluate the survival outcomes of 1-piece complete arch fixed implant-supported zirconia prostheses fabricated by a single dental laboratory supporting several clinicians. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Outcome data were collected over a 5-year period from a large commercial dental laboratory that fabricated 2039 1-piece complete arch fixed implant-supported monolithic zirconia prostheses. All prostheses were fabricated using the same zirconia system from 1 manufacturer, using standardized protocols. The zirconia prostheses were predominantly monolithic, with veneered porcelain restricted to the gingival region. Because a 5-year warranty against fracture was offered by this dental laboratory, prostheses that were returned to the laboratory for remake because of catastrophic failure (fracture) or technical complications were identified, and data were analyzed using a life table. RESULTS: Of the 2039 zirconia prostheses evaluated, at least 319 prostheses had a minimum of 3 years of clinical service, and 69 prostheses had a minimum of 4 years of clinical service. A total of 6 fractures were reported, resulting in a first-year interval survival rate of 99.8% and a 5-year cumulative survival rate of 99.3%. Six zirconia prostheses were returned to the laboratory during the 5-year period because of technical complications related to the debonding of titanium cylinders, and 3 prostheses were returned because of fracture of the titanium cylinders. No prostheses were returned because of chipping of the veneered gingival porcelain. CONCLUSIONS: Practice-based evidence from this large sample, short-term retrospective study showed that 1-piece complete arch fixed implant-supported zirconia prostheses with veneered porcelain restricted to the gingival region showed a cumulative survival rate of 99.3% in a 5-year period. The technical complication rate related to this type of prosthesis was minimal.

A maxillary fixed bridge supported by dental implants: treatment sequence and soft-tissue considerations.

Reconstruction of a patient's maxillary arch with dental implants is a multi-step process that includes esthetics, phonetics, lip support, bone support, occlusion, medical and dental history, and patient values. This clinical report details the step-by-step process--with a rationale for each step--for one patient who elected to reconstruct a maxillary arch with an implant-supported fixed prosthesis. Diagnosis, treatment planning, and appointment sequence are described, as is the importance of establishing soft-tissue outcomes that enable the patient to properly clean the area.

The CT/CBCT-based team approach to care. Part I: Identiying the implant patient and prosthetic options.

Through a CBCT-based team meeting, the surgical team, restorative dentist, and laboratory team member can better coordinate dental implant treatment on many levels. Once the desired restorative result has been established through conventional means, the information can then be transferred via a radiographic template during the scan acquisition. The type of implant, angulation, width and diameter of the implant, and need for grafting, can be determined with great accuracy. This effective exchange of information can take place during an online meeting at a convenient time for all parties. The treatment planning that is possible within the framework of this digital workflow defines the essence of a team approach to implant reconstruction. The protocol as described in part I of this 3-part series allows for improved diagnosis, treatment planning, and successful clinical outcomes. Part 2 of this series will focus on the surgical aspects of the team approach, in collaboration with the restorative clinician and diagnostic imaging center.

Simplifying fixed implant dental prosthetics.

Through following the FPPD protocol for multiple adjacent implants, and delivering final abutments, picking up the metal framework, and delivering provisionals, many benefits are gained. The benefits of following the FPPD protocol are as follows: The restorative dentist is trying-in and delivering the final abutments in one visit as opposed to removing them and placing them multiple times. This requires less chair time and time for the patient. It also reduces the mechanical stress on the abutment screw and implant body due to the elimination of multiple try-in appointments. When the metal framework is tried-in and verified for fit, the restorative dentist has the opportunity check the retention, check the margins, and make any corrections that might be needed. The abutments will be staying in the mouth when the framework is picked up. This metal try-in allows for a verification of the bite to be given to the dental lab. The delivery of provisionals manufactured by the dental laboratory offers many advantages in the FPPD technique. The patient has a form of tooth much earlier in the traditional appointment sequence. The patient can now offer feedback to the doctor and laboratory for fabrication of the permanent prosthesis with regards to shape and color. The laboratory-fabricated provisionals offer progressive loading to the implants through having a reduced occlusion yet allowing food to stimulate the implants. Overall, the FPPD technique offers shorter appointment times, more rapid delivery of fixed supported teeth, improved doctor-technician communication, and less mechanical wear on the implant parts.