Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Clinical and radiographic outcomes of implant-supported fixed dental prostheses with cantilever extension. A retrospective cohort study with a follow-up of at least 10 years.
Schmid, Eric; Morandini, Michele; Roccuzzo, Andrea; Ramseier, Christoph A; Sculean, Anton; Salvi, Giovanni E.
Afiliação
  • Schmid E; Department of Periodontology, School of Dental Medicine, University of Bern, Bern, Switzerland.
  • Morandini M; Department of Periodontology, School of Dental Medicine, University of Bern, Bern, Switzerland.
  • Roccuzzo A; Department of Periodontology, School of Dental Medicine, University of Bern, Bern, Switzerland.
  • Ramseier CA; Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Copenhagen University Hospital (Rigshospitalet), Copenhagen, Denmark.
  • Sculean A; Department of Periodontology, School of Dental Medicine, University of Bern, Bern, Switzerland.
  • Salvi GE; Department of Periodontology, School of Dental Medicine, University of Bern, Bern, Switzerland.
Clin Oral Implants Res ; 31(12): 1243-1252, 2020 Dec.
Article em En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32991763
ABSTRACT

AIM:

To report the clinical and radiographic outcomes of implant-supported fixed dental prostheses with cantilever extensions (FDPCs) after a function time ≥10 years. MATERIAL AND

METHODS:

Patients with FDPCs in posterior areas were clinically and radiographically re-evaluated. Mesial and distal radiographic marginal bone levels (mBLs) from baseline (i.e. delivery of FDPC) to the follow-up examination were calculated and compared between implant surfaces adjacent to and distant from the cantilever extension. Implant survival rate, pocket probing depth (PPD), presence/absence of bleeding on probing (BoP) and presence/absence of mechanical/technical and biological complications were recorded.

RESULTS:

Twenty-six patients with 30 FDPCs supported by 60 implants were re-evaluated after a mean loading time of 13.3 ± 2.7 years (range 10-18.6 years). One diameter-reduced implant carrying a cantilever extension fractured, yielding a patient-based survival rate of 96.2% (95% CI 0.95/1.0). The mean marginal bone level change was not statistically significantly different from baseline to follow-up (1.2 mm ± 0.9 to 1.6 mm ± 1.7; 95% CI -0.1/0.9; p > .05). The mean PPD changed statistically significantly from 3.4 mm ± 0.7 to 3.7 mm ± 0.7 (95% CI 0.04/0.6; p = .02). Loss of retention occurred ≥ 1x in 9 patients (34.6%, 95% CI 0.44/0.83). At follow-up, peri-implant health was diagnosed in 12 (46.2%), peri-implant mucositis in 7 (26.9%) and peri-implantitis in 7 (26.9%) patients, respectively.

CONCLUSION:

Despite a high rate of loss of retention, the use of implant-supported FDPCs in posterior areas represents a reliable long-term treatment option with a high implant survival rate and minimal peri-implant bone level changes irrespective of the location of the cantilever extension.
Assuntos
Palavras-chave

Texto completo: 1 Coleções: 01-internacional Base de dados: MEDLINE Assunto principal: Implantes Dentários / Perda do Osso Alveolar Tipo de estudo: Etiology_studies / Observational_studies / Prognostic_studies Limite: Humans Idioma: En Revista: Clin Oral Implants Res Assunto da revista: ODONTOLOGIA Ano de publicação: 2020 Tipo de documento: Article País de afiliação: Suíça

Texto completo: 1 Coleções: 01-internacional Base de dados: MEDLINE Assunto principal: Implantes Dentários / Perda do Osso Alveolar Tipo de estudo: Etiology_studies / Observational_studies / Prognostic_studies Limite: Humans Idioma: En Revista: Clin Oral Implants Res Assunto da revista: ODONTOLOGIA Ano de publicação: 2020 Tipo de documento: Article País de afiliação: Suíça