Survival and Mechanical Complications of Posterior Single Implant-Supported Restorations Using Prefabricated Titanium Abutments: A Medium- and Long-Term Retrospective Analysis with up to 10 Years Follow-up.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the survival of implants and abutments and the incidence of mechanical complications of single posterior implant-supported restorations using prefabricated titanium abutments. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This retrospective clinical study analyzed 172 Astra Tech OsseoSpeed internal hexagon implants (Dentsply Sirona) placed in 85 patients with a follow-up between January 2009 and January 2019. All implants were restored with prefabricated titanium abutments and cement-retained metal-ceramic crowns. The clinical outcomes recorded were implant and abutment survival rates and mechanical complications (abutment/implant fractures, screw loosening/fracture, decementation of the superstructure, veneer chipping/fractures) and were analyzed according to age, sex, implant length/diameter, bone graft, arch, implant position, parafunctional habit or dental status, and opposite arch. Kaplan-Meier survival analysis was used to determine whether the distribution of time to event/failure differed based on implant position (premolar or molar), implant diameter, or abutment angulation. RESULTS: During the observation period (mean: 108 months), implant and abutment cumulative survival rates were 97.7% and 98.3%, respectively, with no statistically significant differences between implant positions (molar/premolar), implant diameters (3.5 vs 4 mm), or abutment angles (straight vs 15 degrees). Of the 172 single posterior implant-supported restorations, 14 mechanical complications (8.2%) were recorded. In particular, 3 abutment fractures (1.7%), 2 screw loosenings (1.2%), 2 screw fractures (1.2%), 1 implant fracture (0.6%), 2 chipping/fractures of veneering materials (1.2%), and 4 decementations of the superstructure (2.3%) occurred. CONCLUSION: The single posterior implant-supported restorations using prefabricated titanium abutments remain a clinically acceptable treatment in terms of prosthetic procedure and cost-effectiveness.

The influence of flap design on patients' experiencing pain, swelling, and trismus after mandibular third molar surgery: a scoping systematic review.

Third molar removal surgery usually comes accompanied by postoperative discomfort, which could be influenced by the surgical approach chosen. This scoping systematic review aimed at compiling the available evidence focused on the influence of flap design, including envelope flap (EF), triangular flap (TF), and modified triangular flap (MTF), on postoperative pain, swelling, and trismus, as primary outcome measures, and any result mentioning healing promotion or delay, as secondary outcome measure, after mandibular third molar extraction surgery. An electronic search, complemented by a manual search, of articles published from 1999 to 2020 was conducted in the Medline (PubMed), EMBASE and Web of Science databases including human randomized controlled trials, prospective, and retrospective studies with at least 15 patients. The risk of bias of the included studies was assessed either with the Cochrane's Risk of Bias tool or with the Newcastle-Ottawa scale. Every step of the review was performed independently and in duplicate. The initial electronic search recovered 2102 articles. After applying the inclusion criteria, 12 articles were included. For patient's perceived postoperative pain, TF and MTF frequently reported better results than EF. For swelling, the literature is divided, despite a trend favoring EF. For trismus, data showed that its occurrence is mostly associated with the duration of the surgery rather than with the chosen flap. For healing, the limited data is inconclusive. Finally, randomized studies showed a high risk of bias, whereas nonrandomized studies were mostly of good quality and low risk of bias. Although there was no clear consensus regarding the influence of different flap designs for third mandibular molar extraction on postoperative clinical morbidities; the surgeon's experience, estimated surgical difficulty, molar position and orientation, and surg ery duration should be considered when choosing among the different flap designs.

Patient satisfaction and survival of maxillary overdentures supported by four or six splinted implants: a systematic review with meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Implant-supported overdentures offer enhanced mechanical properties, which lead to better patient satisfaction and survival rates than conventional dentures. However, it is unclear whether these satisfaction levels and survival rates depend on the number of implants supporting the overdenture. Therefore, this systematic review aimed to compare maxillary overdentures supported by four or six splinted implants in terms of patient satisfaction, implant survival, overdenture survival, and prosthodontic complications. METHODS: Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE (PubMed), and EMBASE databases were systematically searched and complemented by hand searching from 2000 to 2019, employing a combination of specific keywords. Studies comparing the use of four versus six implants for supporting overdentures with at least one-year of follow-up after prosthesis installation and including ten fully edentulous patients were included. The risk of bias (RoB) was analyzed with Cochrane's RoB 2 and Newcastle-Ottawa tools. Implants and prosthesis survival rates were analyzed by random-effects meta-analysis and expressed as risk ratios or risk differences, respectively, and by the non-parametric unpaired Fisher's test. RESULTS: A total of 15 from 1865 articles were included, and reported follow-up times after implant placement ranged from 1 to 10 years. Irrespective of the number of implants used, high scores were reported by all studies investigating patient satisfaction. Meta-analysis and non-parametric Fisher's test showed no statistical differences regarding the survival rate of implants (P = 0.34, P = 0.3) or overdentures (P = 0.74, P = 0.9) when using 4 versus 6 splinted implants to support overdentures, and no significant differences regarding prosthodontic complications were found between groups. Randomized studies presented high RoB and non-randomized studies presented acceptable quality. CONCLUSIONS: Within the limits of this systematic review, we can conclude that the bar-supported overdenture on four implants is not inferior to the overdenture supported by six implants for rehabilitating the edentulous maxilla, in terms of patient satisfaction, survival rates of implants and overdentures, and prosthodontic complications.

The influence of flap design on patients' experiencing pain, swelling, and trismus after mandibular third molar surgery: a scoping systematic review

Abstract Third molar removal surgery usually comes accompanied by postoperative discomfort, which could be influenced by the surgical approach chosen. This scoping systematic review aimed at compiling the available evidence focused on the influence of flap design, including envelope flap (EF), triangular flap (TF), and modified triangular flap (MTF), on postoperative pain, swelling, and trismus, as primary outcome measures, and any result mentioning healing promotion or delay, as secondary outcome measure, after mandibular third molar extraction surgery. An electronic search, complemented by a manual search, of articles published from 1999 to 2020 was conducted in the Medline (PubMed), EMBASE and Web of Science databases including human randomized controlled trials, prospective, and retrospective studies with at least 15 patients. The risk of bias of the included studies was assessed either with the Cochrane's Risk of Bias tool or with the Newcastle-Ottawa scale. Every step of the review was performed independently and in duplicate. The initial electronic search recovered 2102 articles. After applying the inclusion criteria, 12 articles were included. For patient's perceived postoperative pain, TF and MTF frequently reported better results than EF. For swelling, the literature is divided, despite a trend favoring EF. For trismus, data showed that its occurrence is mostly associated with the duration of the surgery rather than with the chosen flap. For healing, the limited data is inconclusive. Finally, randomized studies showed a high risk of bias, whereas nonrandomized studies were mostly of good quality and low risk of bias. Although there was no clear consensus regarding the influence of different flap designs for third mandibular molar extraction on postoperative clinical morbidities; the surgeon's experience, estimated surgical difficulty, molar position and orientation, and surg ery duration should be considered when choosing among the different flap designs.

Custom abutments on tilted implants in the maxilla: A clinical report.

The aim of this work is to describe a case of severe disparallelism between two implants supporting a cement-retained bridge, placed in the maxilla, employing two custom-angled abutments. Fractured abutment screw and fractured abutment involved two implant restorations in the maxilla. Once prosthetic components have been removed, a new prosthetic rehabilitation has been planned. The divergence between the implants was measured, obtaining an angle of divergence of 39°. Then, two custom-angled titanium abutments and two metal-ceramic splinted crowns were realized.

Splinting vs Not Splinting Four Implants Supporting a Maxillary Overdenture: A Systematic Review.

PURPOSE: To investigate the influence of splinted vs unsplinted designs for a maxillary overdenture supported by four implants in terms of the outcome measures implant survival, overdenture longevity, and patient satisfaction. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A systematic search, complemented by a handsearch, was carried out in the Embase, MEDLINE (PubMed), and Web of Science databases from 2000 to 2018. The PRISMA statement and a PICO approach were adopted. Free-text words were used in the strategy search, including "4-implant-retained overdenture," "4-implant-supported overdenture," "implant-supported overdenture," "implant-retained overdenture," "maxillary overdenture," "splinted design," "un-splinted design," and their combinations. All selected articles provided at least a 1-year follow-up, 10 fully edentulous patients, and at least one of the following clinical outcomes: survival rate of implants, survival rate of overdentures, and/or patient satisfaction scores. Nonparametric Fisher test for unpaired data was adopted in order to analyze data deriving from the survival rates of implants and overdentures. RESULTS: The initial electronic search produced a total of 2,922 articles. After applying the inclusion criteria, 14 articles were included. The mean follow-up time after implant placement ranged from 1 to 10 years. No statistical difference was detected in the survival rate of implants between the splinted implant group and the unsplinted implant group (P = .1). Only 4 included studies reported an overdenture survival rate of lower than 95%. It is interesting to note that among these 4 studies, 3 employed four splinted implants with a bar anchorage; however, no statistical difference was detected in the survival rate of overdentures between the splinted and unsplinted groups (P = .47). High scores were reported by all studies investigating patient satisfaction. CONCLUSION: Within the limits of this systematic review, it can be concluded that the survival rates of implants and overdentures and patient satisfaction with a maxillary overdenture supported by four implants were not influenced by the overdenture design, and no statistical difference was detected between the splinted and unsplinted groups.

The number of implants required to support a maxillary overdenture: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

PURPOSE: The number of implants needed to support a maxillary overdenture is still a controversial issue. The aim of this systematic review was to investigate the number of implants required to support a maxillary overdenture in order to obtain optimal treatment outcomes in terms of implant survival, overdenture longevity and patient satisfaction. STUDY SELECTION: Pubmed and EMBASE databes were systematically searched and complemented by hand searching from 2000 to 2017. The Prisma statement and a PICOS approach were adopted. All selected articles provided at least two-year follow-up and 10 totally edentulous patients. Survival rate of implants and overdentures were statistically analyzed according to number of implants and according to splitting technique, employing non-parametric Fisher Test for unpaired data. For the pooled analysis of implant failures, the odds ratio between group of 4 splinted implants and group of more than 4 splinted was calculated. RESULTS: A total of 28 articles were included. Data analysis of the included studies showed that the survival rate of implants appeared higher in ≥ 4 implants group, whereas the high survival rate of overdentures and patient satisfaction were not significantly influenced by the number of implants. CONCLUSIONS: The findings of our analysis indicate that overall the most frequent tendency is to place at least four implants, splinted or unsplinted, in order to ensure a higher survival rate of implants. However, the relationship between overdenture survival, the patient's quality of life, and the number of implants required to support a maxillary overdenture has yet to be clarified.

Analysis and management of implant-prosthetic complications: Description of a diagnostic and therapeutic algorithm with a clinical case.

PATIENT: A 65-year-old non-smoker man with stabilized chronic periodontitis and in good general health conditions presented to our observation. The patient reported crown mobility, gingival inflammation and localized pain, corresponding to the mandibular right first molar rehabilitated with a cement-retained implant crown. This clinical situation suspected a fracture of an implant-prosthetic component. Through the described diagnostic algorithm, an abutment hexagon fracture was revealed. Thus, a minimally invasive treatment was carried out in order to use the residual implant-prosthetic components for a new implant-prosthetic rehabilitation. DISCUSSION: Fractures of implant-prosthetic components are clinical occurrences that may result in irreversible failures. The main causes of a possible fracture are dependent on biomechanical considerations and production processes of implant-prosthetic components. The respect of the rigorous planning and the employment of the implant-prosthetic devices of the same manufacturer are recommended. CONCLUSIONS: Specific employments and protocols have to be offered in order to manage the fractures of implant-prosthetic components. This work showed that through the described diagnostic and therapeutic algorithm, the clinician can be guided towards a proper diagnosis and a correct management of the cases where a fracture of implant-prosthetic components may occur.

Multidisciplinary Approach in the Management of a Complex Case: Implant-Prosthetic Rehabilitation of a Periodontal Smoking Patient with Partial Edentulism, Malocclusion, and Aesthetic Diseases.

Complex periprosthetic cases are considered as challenges by clinicians. Clinical and radiographic parameters should be considered separately to make the right choice between an endodontically or periodontally compromised treated tooth and implant. Therefore, in order to decide whether the tooth is safe or not, data that have to be collected are specific parameters of both the patient and the clinician. In addition, the presence of periodontal, prosthetic, and orthodontic diseases requires patients to be set in multidisciplinary approach. The aim of this case report is to describe how the multidisciplinary approach could be the best way to manage difficult cases of implant-prosthetic rehabilitation. How to rehabilitate with fixed prosthesis on natural teeth and dental implants a smoker patient who presents with active periodontitis, multiple edentulous areas, dental malocclusion, and severe aesthetic problems was also described.

Clinical Application of the PES/WES Index on Natural Teeth: Case Report and Literature Review.

The use of reliable indices to evaluate the aesthetic outcomes in the aesthetic area is an important and objective clinical aid to monitor the results over time. According to the literature various indices were proposed to evaluate aesthetic outcomes of implant-prosthetic rehabilitation of the anterior area like Peri-Implant and Crown Index [PICI], Implant Crown Aesthetic Index [ICAI], Pink Esthetic Score/White Esthetic Score [PES/WES], and Pink Esthetic Score [PES] but none of them was related to prosthetic rehabilitation on natural teeth. The aim of this study is to verify the validity of PES/WES index for natural tooth-prosthetic rehabilitation of the anterior area. As secondary objective, we proposed to evaluate the long-term predictability of this clinical application, one of which is presented below, following the analysis of the most currently accepted literature.