12/30/2023 0 Comments Day r survival cementWittneben JG, Joda T, Weber HP, Brägger U.A comparison between screw- and cement-retained implant prostheses. ![]() If implant position is compromised and a screw-retained connection cannot be used, utilizing a custom abutment to place the crown margin < 2 mm submarginally is recommended. In addition, the majority of excess cement was not found with radiographic examination. This study revealed that more remnant cement was found on sites with a deeper subgingival margin area. 2 Linkevicius 5 investigated the relationship between crown margin position and undetected residual cement. To reduce complications associated with the presence of residual cement, clinicians should consider using screw retention as the connection of choice. This represents the obvious etiologic factor for iatrogenic peri-implant disease (Figure 2). Upon examination, residual cement was noted in the subgingival area. Clinically, tissue inflammation was noted on the gingival margin of #8. In this case (Figure 1), the patient presented to a graduate clinic with 5-mm to 7-mm probing depths and bleeding on probing around implant #8. Marginal gingival inflammation (A) and bone loss (B) on implant #8. 4 Thus, it was concluded that residual cement might play an important role as a bacterial reservoir, leading to soft tissue irritation that contributes to peri-implant tissue breakdown. A clinical trial has shown that approximately 80% of the cement-retained implant prostheses with radiological and clinical signs of peri-implant disease had subgingival residual cement. In addition, the major negative aspect of cement retention is the presence of residual cement following delivery of the prosthesis that can lead to peri-implant mucositis and peri-implantitis. However, this study revealed that screw-retained fixed prostheses exhibited a slightly lower biological complication rate, such as the presence of fistula/suppuration rates. There was no statistically significant difference between the two groups. The 5-year cumulative survival rate of cement-retained reconstruction was 96.03%, while it was 95.55% for screw-retained prostheses. ![]() 1,2 A systematic review by Wittneben et al 3 compared cement- and screw-retained implant-supported restorations. However, there is debate over which is the better option in the long term.Ī cement-retained prosthesis has several advantages over a screw-retained prosthesis in terms of cost, ease of fabrication, lack of an access hole (advantageous for a narrow-diameter implant with limited restorative space), and ability to change the angulation of the implant axis by utilizing angled abutments. ![]() Both screw- and cement-retained prostheses are acceptable treatment options for single and multiple fixed implant restorations.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |