Reconstruction of the severely atrophic mandible using calvarial split bone grafts for implant-supported oral rehabilitation

OBJECTIVES: This article describes reconstruction of the severely atrophic mandible using calvarial bone grafts for implant-supported prosthetic oral rehabilitation. The study aim was to evaluate the efficacy of the treatment by determining implant survival and complication rates, and the extent of the postoperative graft resorption. STUDY DESIGN: Ten patients who underwent the treatment were followed clinically and radiologically using panoramic radiographs and CT scans during a mean postoperative period of 30 months. RESULTS: Good bone healing was observable 6 months postoperatively. The height reduction measured on panoramic radiographs was insignificant (mean 0.68 mm). Only minor complications occurred. Implant survival was 95%. Prosthodontic treatment was successfully performed in all cases, resulting in an improvement of oral function. Histological analysis of 1 bone biopsy showed minimal resorptive changes in otherwise very dense bone. CONCLUSION: Augmentation using calvarial grafts is a promising treatment alternative for the severely atrophic mandible.

A systematic review of the 5-year survival and complication rates of implant-supported single crowns

OBJECTIVES: The objective of this systematic review was to assess the 5-year survival of implant-supported single crowns (SCs) and to describe the incidence of biological and technical complications. METHODS: An electronic MEDLINE search complemented by manual searching was conducted to identify prospective and retrospective cohort studies on SCs with a mean follow-up time of at least 5 years. Failure and complication rates were analyzed using random-effects Poisson's regression models to obtain summary estimates of 5-year proportions. RESULTS: Twenty-six studies from an initial yield of 3601 titles were finally selected and data were extracted. In a meta-analysis of these studies, survival of implants supporting SCs was 96.8% [95% confidence interval (CI): 95.9-97.6%] after 5 years. The survival rate of SCs supported by implants was 94.5% (95% CI: 92.5-95.9%) after 5 years of function. The survival rate of metal-ceramic crowns, 95.4% (95% CI: 93.6-96.7%), was significantly (P=0.005) higher than the survival rate, 91.2% (95% CI: 86.8-94.2%), of all-ceramic crowns. Peri-implantitis and soft tissue complications occurred adjacent to 9.7% of the SCs and 6.3% of the implants had bone loss exceeding 2 mm over the 5-year observation period. The cumulative incidence of implant fractures after 5 years was 0.14%. After 5 years, the cumulative incidence of screw or abutment loosening was 12.7% and 0.35% for screw or abutment fracture. For supra-structure-related complications, the cumulative incidence of ceramic or veneer fractures was 4.5%. CONCLUSION: It can be concluded that after an observation period of 5 years, high survival rates for implants and implant-supported SCs can be expected. However, biological and particularly technical complications are frequent.

Implant-supported distal extensions in severely resorbed posterior alveolar ridges

The application of implant-borne rehabilitations in residual alveolar ridges may be restricted by various anatomic conditions, as available bone height and characteristics. Here we report the clinical outcome of implants placed in severely resorbed posterior ridges, in addition to various implant-supported treatment modalities. Extra Oral implants (Straumann, Basel, Switzerland) with the intraosseous length of 2.5–5mm were installed in the posterior alveolar ridges. Following the healing period of 4–6 months, implants were exposed and included in the distal extensions of fixed and removable prosthesis. At recall appointments were collected surgical, clinical and radiological variables, including the evidence of adverse effects. An 8-years life table analysis was calculated. The treatment protocol was applied in thirty-five patients, presenting 31 removable and 4 fixed complete implant-supported dentures. A total of 61 Extra Oral implants were placed posterior to the distal implants, at the mean distance of 29.8mm (range 15.6–62.7mm). Three implants failed during the osteointegration phase, yielding an 8-year cumulative success rate of 92.24%. Following the osteointegration period, no major bone loss or other adverse events were found. The clinical results indicated that the Extra Oral implants may be successfully used in addition to the other, longer implants. Thus, a relatively long extension in the posterior region may be employed. With careful preoperative planning, this technique offers a simple and beneficial complementary treatment option for removable and fixed complete dentures.

Fixed mandibular and maxillary implant rehabilitation in a fully edentulous patient: a case report

The complete dental rehabilitation of a patient with a failing dentition using fixed implant-supported prostheses requires carefully planned and well-sequenced treatment. This case report presents the treatment steps and sequencing for a patient in whom removable provisional prostheses were not an option. While an immediate loading protocol was used in the mandible, a staged approach featuring strategic extractions and implant placement in several phases was applied in the maxilla. The major advantage of this treatment protocol was that the patient was maintained in fixed prostheses throughout the treatment.

Comparative study of four retentive anchor systems for implant supported overdentures--retention force changes

OBJECTIVES: Wear of attachments leads to a loss of retention and potentially reduces the function of complete dentures. This study evaluated the retention force changes of different prefabricated attachment systems for implant-supported overdentures to estimate the wear constancy and applicability in clinical practice. METHODS: Four prefabricated attachment systems were tested [Group SG: retentive ball attachment (Straumann, Switzerland) with gold matrix, Group ST: retentive ball attachment (Straumann, Switzerland) with titanium spring matrix, Group IB: UNOR i-Ball with Ecco matrix (UNOR, Switzerland) and Group IMZ: IMZ-TwinPlus ball attachment with gold matrix (DENTSPLY Friadent, Germany)]. Ten samples of each system were subjected to 10,000 insertion-separation cycles. RESULTS: Results showed that all types of attachments showed wear, which led to a loss of retention force after an initial increase at the beginning of the wear simulation. Attachments with a plastic retention insert or gold matrices underwent the smallest changes in retention force. The titanium spring system showed the largest changes in retention force and a greater variation between the different cycles and specimen. This behaviour is probably caused by a large fitting tolerance of the titanium spring. CONCLUSIONS: Attachment systems which possess a male and female component of different material composition are preferable. They show smaller changes in the retention force. For retention force increase and wear compensation, an attachment system should be adjustable.

[Rehabilitation of a periodontally compromised dentition with implant-supported zirconia bridges. Case report]

Clinical aspects of reconstruction with fix prosthesis and dental implants in a patient with a history of periodontitis is shown. A successful stabilization and rehabilitation of the periodontally involved dentition can be achieved with tooth-worn crown and bridge reconstructions. From a functional and aesthetic point of view the result may not be satisfying due to mobility and overlength of the teeth and open approximal spaces. Today, dentist and patient have often to weigh if teeth shall be maintained or replaced by dental implants. Thereby, both must be aware of the fact that in complex cases long-term success and aesthetic outcome may be difficult to predict. An intense discussion with the patient on his expectations, invasive treatment, risks with regard to biologic and prosthetic aspects is mandatory and must be based on the best scientific evidence available. The present case report shows different considerations and describes a radical solution which meets the patient's needs and is based on modern CAD-CAM technology.

Improvements in Implant Dentistry over the Last Decade: Comparison of Survival and Complication Rates in Older and Newer Publications

Purpose: The objective of this systematic review was to assess and compare the survival and complication rates of implant-supported prostheses reported in studies published in the year 2000 and before, to those reported in studies published after the year 2000. Materials and Methods: Three electronic searches complemented by manual searching were conducted to identify 139 prospective and retrospective studies on implant-supported prostheses. The included studies were divided in two groups: a group of 31 older studies published in the year 2000 or before, and a group of 108 newer studies published after the year 2000. Survival and complication rates were calculated using Poisson regression models, and multivariable robust Poisson regression was used to formally compare the outcomes of older and newer studies. Results: The 5-year survival rate of implant-supported prostheses was significantly increased in newer studies compared with older studies. The overall survival rate increased from 93.5% to 97.1%. The survival rate for cemented prostheses increased from 95.2% to 97.9%; for screw-retained reconstruction, from 77.6% to 96.8%; for implant-supported single crowns, from 92.6% to 97.2%; and for implant-supported fixed dental prostheses (FDPs), from 93.5% to 96.4%. The incidence of esthetic complications decreased in more recent studies compared with older ones, but the incidence of biologic complications was similar. The results for technical complications were inconsistent. There was a significant reduction in abutment or screw loosening by implant-supported FDPs. On the other hand, the total number of technical complications and the incidence of fracture of the veneering material was significantly increased in the newer studies. To explain the increased rate of complications, minor complications are probably reported in more detail in the newer publications. Conclusions: The results of the present systematic review demonstrated a positive learning curve in implant dentistry, represented in higher survival rates and lower complication rates reported in more recent clinical studies. The incidence of esthetic, biologic, and technical complications, however, is still high. Hence, it is important to identify these complications and their etiology to make implant treatment even more predictable in the future.

Complete digital workflow for the production of implant-supported single-unit monolithic crowns.

OBJECTIVES The aim of this case series was to introduce a complete digital workflow for the production of monolithic implant crowns. MATERIAL AND METHODS Six patients were treated with implant-supported crowns made of resin nano ceramic (RNC). Starting with an intraoral optical scan (IOS), and following a CAD/CAM process, the monolithic crowns were bonded either to a novel prefabricated titanium abutment base (group A) or to a CAD/CAM-generated individualized titanium abutment (group B) in premolar or molar sites on a soft tissue level dental implant. Economic analyses included clinical and laboratory steps. An esthetic evaluation was performed to compare the two abutment-crown combinations. RESULTS None of the digitally constructed RNC crowns required any clinical adaptation. Overall mean work time calculations revealed obvious differences for group A (65.3 min) compared with group B (86.5 min). Esthetic analysis demonstrated a more favorable outcome for the prefabricated bonding bases. CONCLUSIONS Prefabricated or individualized abutments on monolithic RNC crowns using CAD/CAM technology in a model-free workflow seem to provide a feasible and streamlined treatment approach for single-edentulous space rehabilitation in the posterior region. However, RNC as full-contour material has to be considered experimental, and further large-scale clinical investigations with long-term follow-up observation are necessary.

Clinical Performance of Screw- Versus Cement-Retained Fixed Implant-Supported Reconstructions- A Systematic Review.

PURPOSE To assess the survival outcomes and reported complications of screw- and cement-retained fixed reconstructions supported on dental implants. MATERIALS AND METHODS A Medline (PubMed), Embase, and Cochrane electronic database search from 2000 to September 2012 using MeSH and free-text terms was conducted. Selected inclusion and exclusion criteria guided the search. All studies were first reviewed by abstract and subsequently by full-text reading by two examiners independently. Data were extracted by two examiners and statistically analyzed using a random effects Poisson regression. RESULTS From 4,324 abstracts, 321 full-text articles were reviewed. Seventy-three articles were found to qualify for inclusion. Five-year survival rates of 96.03% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 93.85% to 97.43%) and 95.55% (95% CI: 92.96% to 97.19%) were calculated for cemented and screw-retained reconstructions, respectively (P = .69). Comparison of cement and screw retention showed no difference when grouped as single crowns (I-SC) (P = .10) or fixed partial dentures (I-FDP) (P = .49). The 5-year survival rate for screw-retained full-arch reconstructions was 96.71% (95% CI: 93.66% to 98.31). All-ceramic reconstruction material exhibited a significantly higher failure rate than porcelain-fused-to-metal (PFM) in cemented reconstructions (P = .01) but not when comparing screw-retained reconstructions (P = .66). Technical and biologic complications demonstrating a statistically significant difference included loss of retention (P ≤ .01), abutment loosening (P ≤ .01), porcelain fracture and/or chipping (P = .02), presence of fistula/suppuration (P ≤ .001), total technical events (P = .03), and total biologic events (P = .02). CONCLUSIONS Although no statistical difference was found between cement- and screw-retained reconstructions for survival or failure rates, screw-retained reconstructions exhibited fewer technical and biologic complications overall. There were no statistically significant differences between the failure rates of the different reconstruction types (I-SCs, I-FDPs, full-arch I-FDPs) or abutment materials (titanium, gold, ceramic). The failure rate of cemented reconstructions was not influenced by the choice of a specific cement, though cement type did influence loss of retention.

Precision of fit of implant-supported screw-retained 10-unit computer-aided-designed and computer-aided-manufactured frameworks made from zirconium dioxide and titanium: an in vitro study

OBJECTIVE To analyze the precision of fit of implant-supported screw-retained computer-aided-designed and computer-aided-manufactured (CAD/CAM) zirconium dioxide (ZrO) frameworks. MATERIALS AND METHODS Computer-aided-designed and computer-aided-manufactured ZrO frameworks (NobelProcera) for a screw-retained 10-unit implant-supported reconstruction on six implants (FDI positions 15, 13, 11, 21, 23, 25) were fabricated using a laser (ZrO-L, N = 6) and a mechanical scanner (ZrO-M, N = 5) for digitizing the implant platform and the cuspid-supporting framework resin pattern. Laser-scanned CAD/CAM titanium (TIT-L, N = 6) and cast CoCrW-alloy frameworks (Cast, N = 5) fabricated on the same model and designed similar to the ZrO frameworks were the control. The one-screw test (implant 25 screw-retained) was applied to assess the vertical microgap between implant and framework platform with a scanning electron microscope. The mean microgap was calculated from approximal and buccal values. Statistical comparison was performed with non-parametric tests. RESULTS No statistically significant pairwise difference was observed between the relative effects of vertical microgap between ZrO-L (median 14 μm; 95% CI 10-26 μm), ZrO-M (18 μm; 12-27 μm) and TIT-L (15 μm; 6-18 μm), whereas the values of Cast (236 μm; 181-301 μm) were significantly higher (P < 0.001) than the three CAD/CAM groups. A monotonous trend of increasing values from implant 23 to 15 was observed in all groups (ZrO-L, ZrO-M and Cast P < 0.001, TIT-L P = 0.044). CONCLUSIONS Optical and tactile scanners with CAD/CAM technology allow for the fabrication of highly accurate long-span screw-retained ZrO implant-reconstructions. Titanium frameworks showed the most consistent precision. Fit of the cast alloy frameworks was clinically inacceptable.

Patient-reported outcomes of maxillary implant-supported overdentures compared with conventional dentures

OBJECTIVE The aim of the present prospective clinical study was to compare patient-reported outcomes for maxillary conventional dentures and maxillary implant-supported dentures. MATERIAL AND METHODS Twenty-one patients (6 women and 15 men) being edentulous in the maxilla and encountering problems with their existing dentures were included. Twelve patients (4 women and 8 men) received a new set of conventional dentures, due to insufficient dentures. In nine patients (2 women and 7 men), the existing dentures were adjusted by means of relining or rebasing. All patients received implant-supported dentures on two retentive anchors. In total, 42 implants were inserted in the anterior maxilla. The participants rated their satisfaction on their existing conventional dentures, 2 months after insertion of new conventional dentures and 2 months after insertion of implant-supported dentures. Thereby, patients responded to questionnaires capturing the oral health impact profile (OHIP) using visual analog scales. Seven domains (functional limitation, physical pain, psychological discomfort, physical, psychological and social disability and handicap) were assessed. Higher scores implied poorer patient satisfaction. In addition, the questionnaire involved the evaluation of cleaning ability, general satisfaction, speech, comfort, esthetics, stability, and chewing ability. Higher scores implied higher patient satisfaction. RESULTS Patient satisfaction significantly increased for implant-supported dentures compared with old dentures in all seven OHIP subgroups, as well as for cleaning ability, general satisfaction, ability to speak, comfort, esthetics, and stability (P < 0.05). The comparison of new conventional dentures and implant-supported dentures revealed a statistically significantly increased satisfaction for functional limitation (difference of 33.2 mm), psychological discomfort (difference of 36.7 mm), physical disability (difference of 36.3 mm), and social disability (difference of 23.5 mm), (P < 0.05). Additionally, general satisfaction, chewing ability, speech, and stability significantly improved in implant-supported dentures (P < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS Within the limits of this study, maxillary dentures retained by two implants provided some significant short-term improvements over conventional dentures in oral- and health-related quality of life.

Implant-supported mandibular overdentures and cortical bone formation: clinical and radiographic results

PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to evaluate the hard and soft tissue parameters around implants supporting overdentures and the possible influence of increased periimplant bone density (IPBD) on implant success. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of 44 dental implants placed in the mandible of 12 patients were included in the study. Implants were divided in 2 groups in relation to the optically detected IPBD. Periimplant clinical and radiographic variables were collected over the period of 5 years. RESULTS: Periimplant clinical and radiographic parameters for all implants did not change significantly throughout the observation period (P > 0.05). Significant differences were observed between implants with and without IPBD for periimplant soft tissue parameters and Periotest values (P < 0.05). Implants with and without IPBD at 5-year control showed mean bone loss of 0.04 ± 0.48 mm and 0.55 ± 0.96 mm, respectively (P = 0.026). All density values decreased throughout the observation period, except maximal values for implants with IPBD that overcome the initial values at the 5-year control. CONCLUSIONS: Implants supporting overdentures were clinically successful over the period of follow-up. IPBD may be related to the maintenance of the periimplant bone level.

Stiffness, Strength, and Failure Modes of Implant-Supported Monolithic Lithium Disilicate Crowns: Influence of Titanium and Zirconia Abutments

PURPOSE The objective of this study was to evaluate stiffness, strength, and failure modes of monolithic crowns produced using computer-aided design/computer-assisted manufacture, which are connected to diverse titanium and zirconia abutments on an implant system with tapered, internal connections. MATERIALS AND METHODS Twenty monolithic lithium disilicate (LS2) crowns were constructed and loaded on bone level-type implants in a universal testing machine under quasistatic conditions according to DIN ISO 14801. Comparative analysis included a 2 × 2 format: prefabricated titanium abutments using proprietary bonding bases (group A) vs nonproprietary bonding bases (group B), and customized zirconia abutments using proprietary Straumann CARES (group C) vs nonproprietary Astra Atlantis (group D) material. Stiffness and strength were assessed and calculated statistically with the Wilcoxon rank sum test. Cross-sections of each tested group were inspected microscopically. RESULTS Loaded LS2 crowns, implants, and abutment screws in all tested specimens (groups A, B, C, and D) did not show any visible fractures. For an analysis of titanium abutments (groups A and B), stiffness and strength showed equally high stability. In contrast, proprietary and nonproprietary customized zirconia abutments exhibited statistically significant differences with a mean strength of 366 N (Astra) and 541 N (CARES) (P < .05); as well as a mean stiffness of 884 N/mm (Astra) and 1,751 N/mm (CARES) (P < .05), respectively. Microscopic cross-sections revealed cracks in all zirconia abutments (groups C and D) below the implant shoulder. CONCLUSION Depending on the abutment design, prefabricated titanium abutment and proprietary customized zirconia implant-abutment connections in conjunction with monolithic LS2 crowns had the best results in this laboratory investigation.

Influence of Abutment Design on Stiffness, Strength, and Failure of Implant-Supported Monolithic Resin Nano Ceramic (RNC) Crowns

BACKGROUND Recent technical development allows the digital manufacturing of monolithic reconstructions with high-performance materials. For implant-supported crowns, the fixation requires an abutment design onto which the reconstruction can be bonded. PURPOSE The aim of this laboratory investigation was to analyze stiffness, strength, and failure modes of implant-supported, computer-assisted design and computer-aided manufacturing (CAD/CAM)-generated resin nano ceramic (RNC) crowns bonded to three different titanium abutments. MATERIALS AND METHODS Eighteen monolithic RNC crowns were produced and loaded in a universal testing machine under quasi-static condition according to DIN ISO 14801. With regard to the type of titanium abutment, three groups were defined: (1) prefabricated cementable standard; (2) CAD/CAM-constructed individualized; and (3) novel prefabricated bonding base. Stiffness and strength were measured and analyzed statistically with Wilcoxon rank sum test. Sections of the specimens were examined microscopically. RESULTS Stiffness demonstrated high stability for all specimens loaded in the physiological loading range with means and standard deviations of 1,579 ± 120 N/mm (group A), 1,733 ± 89 N/mm (group B), and 1,704 ± 162 N/mm (group C). Mean strength of the novel prefabricated bonding base (group C) was 17% lower than of the two other groups. Plastic deformations were detectable for all implant-abutment crown connections. CONCLUSIONS Monolithic implant crowns made of RNC seem to represent a feasible and stable prosthetic construction under laboratory testing conditions with strength higher than the average occlusal force, independent of the different abutment designs used in this investigation.

Retrievability of implant-supported crowns when using three different cements: a controlled clinical trial

PURPOSE The purpose of this study was to analyze the removal of implant-supported crowns retained by three different cements using an air-accelerated crown remover and to evaluate the patients' response to the procedure. MATERIALS AND METHODS This controlled clinical trial was conducted with 21 patients (10 women, 11 men; mean age: 51 ± 10.2 years) who had received a total of 74 implants (all placed in the posterior zone of the mandible). Four months after implant surgery, the crowns were cemented on standard titanium abutments of different heights. Three different cements (two temporary: Harvard TEMP and Improv; and one definitive: Durelon) were used and randomly assigned to the patients. Eight months later, one blinded investigator removed all crowns. The number of activations of the instrument (CORONAflex, KaVo) required for crown removal was recorded. The patients completed a questionnaire retrospectively to determine the impact of the procedure and to gauge their subjective perception. A linear regression model and descriptive statistics were used for data analysis. RESULTS All crowns could be retrieved without any technical complications or damage. Both abutment height (P = .019) and cement type (P = .004) had a significant effect on the number of activations, but the type of cement was more important. An increased total number of activations had no or only a weak correlation to the patients' perception of concussion, noise, pain, and unwillingness to use the device. CONCLUSIONS Cemented implant crowns can be removed, and the application of an air-accelerated device is a practicable method. A type of cement with appropriate retention force has to be selected. The impact on the patients' subjective perception should be taken into account.