Purpose: To compare immediately loaded post-extractive single implants using a definitive abutment versus provisional abutment later replaced by custom-made abutment.
Materials And Methods: In two private clinics, 28 patients in need of one single post-extractive implant in the maxilla or mandible from the left second premolar to the right second premolar area were randomised shortly before tooth extraction to provisional abutment (PA) and definitive abutment (DA) groups. Three patients had to be excluded for buccal wall fracture after tooth extraction. In the PA group, implants were immediately restored using a platform-switched provisional titanium abutment and definitive platform-switched titanium abutments were used in the DA group. In both groups, a non-occluding provisional single crown was provided. Implants were definitively restored after 4 months. In the PA group, the abutment was removed and the impression was made directly on the implant platform. In the DA group an impression of the abutment was made using a retraction cord. Outcome measures were: implant failures; complications; and marginal peri-implant bone level changes. Patients were followed up to 1 year after loading.
Results: Twelve patients were randomised to the DA group and 13 patients to the PA group. At the 12-month follow-up, no implant failed. One biological complication occurred in the DA group and one mechanical complication occurred in the PA group. All complications were successfully treated. One year after loading, implants in the DA group lost an average of 0.11 mm (SD: 0.06) of periimplant bone and implants in PA group about 0.58 mm (SD: 0.11). At the 12-month follow-up, there was a statistically significant difference in bone level change between groups (mean difference: 0.48 mm, CI 95% 0.40; 0.55, P < 0.0001).
Conclusions: Within the limits of this study, the non-removal of abutments placed at the time of surgery resulted in the maintenance of 0.5 mm more bone levels around immediately restored postextractive single implants than repeated abutment removal, although this amount of bone maintenance may not have a clinical impact. Conflicts of interest notification: Dr Tommaso Grandi and Dr Paolo Guazzi serve as consultants for JDentalCare. This study was completely self-financed and no funding was sought or obtained, not even in the form of free materials.
Download full-text PDF |
Source |
---|
Bioengineering (Basel)
November 2024
Department of Prosthodontics, University of Medicine and Pharmacy "Victor Babes", B-dul Revolutiei 1989, No. 9, 300580 Timisoara, Romania.
Dentistry is steadily evolving along the digital pathway at a constant and sure pace. Intraoral scanners (IOSs) started to enhance the precision and trueness of the restorations, making prosthodontics treatment more predictable. The objective of this study was to compare the trueness and internal fit of the printed provisional veneers for 60 preparations with three different types of finish lines.
View Article and Find Full Text PDFOral Maxillofac Surg Clin North Am
December 2024
Private Practice, Brooklyn, NY, USA.
Complete arch oral implant treatment using photogrammetry was studied in 77 patients with 111 arches focusing on digitization of clinical records and optimization of the provisional. The aim of the study was to test the hypothesis that patient satisfaction with the provisional prosthesis during the first 4 months of care determined workflow efficiency and success. Digitization of 8 clinical records was done including centric relation, vertical dimension, esthetics, occlusion, inter-arch space, abutment selection, abutment capture, and soft tissue scan.
View Article and Find Full Text PDFFront Oral Health
December 2024
Department of Substitutive Dental Sciences, College of Dentistry, Imam Abdulrahman Bin Faisal University, Dammam, Saudi Arabia.
Objectives: The influence of printing parameters on the marginal and internal fit of three-dimensional (3D) printed interim fixed partial dentures (IFPDs) has been understudied. This investigation sought to elucidate the impact of printing orientation and post-curing time on these critical factors.
Methods: A total of 260 3-Unit IFDPs were printed using two different resins (130/NextDent C&B MFH and 130/ASIGA DentaTOOTH).
Prim Dent J
December 2024
Todd R. Schoenbaum DDS, MS Professor, Dental College of Georgia, Augusta University, Augusta, Georgia, USA.
Abutment contours, position, tissue thickness, and volume are all key parameters for the successful restoration of implants in the aesthetic zone. This is particularly true for patients with high smile lines and high aesthetic expectations. This narrative review will provide a synopsis of the known science of implant abutments and peri-implant tissues in this area and cover specialised techniques, materials, and protocols to improve outcomes with increased predictability.
View Article and Find Full Text PDFJ Esthet Restor Dent
December 2024
Analysis of Techniques, Material and Instruments Applied to Digital Dentistry and CAD/CAM Procedures Research Group, University Complutense of Madrid, Madrid, Spain.
Objective: This clinical case describes a multidisciplinary retreatment of a patient with anterior fixed dental prostheses (FDPs) using minimally invasive restorations and a biologically oriented preparation technique (BOPT).
Clinical Considerations: A 56-year-old female patient, treated 30 years ago with a metal-ceramic FDP due to dental agenesis, presented a misfit prosthesis at the gingival margin, black spaces, and food retention at the pontics. Notably, tooth number 2.
Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!