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

Marco, Gennaro De; Francesco, Fabrizio Di; Lanza, Alessandro

doi:10.1016/j.jpor.2017.08.001

Cited by 6 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 20 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…No correlation was found between resin tooth fractures and prosthesis type. Occlusal overloading caused by oral parafunctional activities such as bruxism is the major etiologic factor in the biomechanical complications of implant treatment [ 29 ]. Therefore, a careful occlusal adjustment should be carried out to acquire better stress distribution and help establish functional contacts to avoid stresses caused by oblique forces during eccentric movements in both groups [ 30 ].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Digitally prefabricated versus conventionally fabricated implant-supported full-arch provisional prosthesis: a retrospective cohort study

2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background To evaluate and compare the clinical outcomes of digitally prefabricated and conventionally fabricated implant-supported full-arch provisional prostheses. Methods In this retrospective study, a total of 39 patients (22 males and 17 females) who underwent implant-supported full-arch rehabilitation using the All-on-4 concept with an immediate loading protocol were included: 20 patients treated with digitally prefabricated provisional prostheses were assigned into Group A, and 19 patients treated with conventionally fabricated provisional prostheses were assigned into Group B. Implant/provisional prosthesis survival rates and complications were reviewed. Marginal bone loss (MBL) was investigated by CBCT. Surgical time, restorative time, and total operative time were analyzed. Postoperative pain and swelling were evaluated with the visual analog scale (VAS). The oral health impact profile (OHIP) questionnaire was administered before and after surgery. Results The implant/provisional prosthesis survival rate was 100%, and complications appeared with low frequency in both groups, while the mean MBL was 0.30 ± 0.29 mm in Group A and 0.31 ± 0.41 mm in Group B after 3~ 6 months (P > 0.05). The average restorative time in Group A (116.16 ± 16.61 min) was significantly shorter than that in Group B (242.11 ± 30.14 min) (P < 0.05). Patients in Group A showed lower pain/swelling VAS scores after surgery than Group B (P < 0.05). Low OHIP scores with high satisfaction with the overall effects were shown in both groups. Conclusion Prefabricated prostheses reduced the prosthetic time and postoperative discomfort in patients whose immediate rehabilitation was based on the All-on-4 concept. This prefabrication technology may be a predictable alternative to improve the short-term clinical outcome of implant-supported full-arch provisional rehabilitation.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Digitally prefabricated versus conventionally fabricated implant-supported full-arch provisional prosthesis: a retrospective cohort study

2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…When a prefabricated prosthesis is intended to be used for a screw-retained acrylic resin prosthesis, great attention should be paid to the improvement of accuracy. A recent meta-analysis and systematic review involving more than 1,400 implants revealed a total mean deviation of 1.12 mm at the implant entry point and 1.39 mm at the apex [23]. Since error was unavoidable, the sleeve hole diameter of provisional prosthesis was designed to be 1.5 mm larger than the diameter of the secondary abutment to ensure the passive t.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…No correlation was found between resin tooth fractures and prosthesis type. Occlusal overloading caused by oral parafunctional activities such as bruxism was the major etiologic factor in the biomechanical complications of implant treatment [23]. Therefore, a careful occlusal adjustment should be carried out to acquire better stress distribution and help establish functional contacts to avoid stresses caused by oblique forces during eccentric movements in both groups [26].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Digitally prefabricated versus conventionally fabricated implant-supported full-arch provisional prosthesis: A retrospective cohort study

Chen

Lai

Zhu

2022

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: To evaluate and compare the clinical outcomes of digitally prefabricated and conventionally fabricated implant-supported full-arch provisional prostheses.Methods: Thirty-nine patients who underwent implant-supported full-arch rehabilitation were included in this study. Implant-supported provisional prostheses were digitally prefabricated before implant surgery in group A (20 patients), while implant-supported provisional prostheses were conventionally fabricated immediately after surgery in group B (19 patients). Implant/prosthesis survival rate and complications were recorded. Marginal bone loss（MBL）was investigated by CBCT. Surgical time, restorative time, and total operative time were analyzed. Postoperative pain and swelling were evaluated with visual analog scale (VAS). The Oral Health Impact Profile (OHIP) questionnaire was administered before and after surgery.Results: The implant/prosthesis survival rate was 100% and complications appeared with low frequency in both group, while the mean MBL was 0.30±0.29 mm in group A and 0.31±0.41 mm in group B after 3~6 months(P>0.05). The average restorative time in group A (116.16±16.61 mins) was significantly shorter than that in group B (242.11±30.14 mins) (P<0.05). Patients in group A showed lower pain/swelling VAS scores after surgery than group B (P<0.05). Low OHIP scores with high satisfaction to the overall effects were showed in both groups. Conclusions: Prefabricated prosthesis could reduce prosthetic time and postoperative discomfort in patient whose immediate rehabilitation was based on All-on-4 concept. The prefabrication technology could be a predictable alternative to improve the short-term clinical outcome of implant-supported full-arch provisional rehabilitation.

show abstract

“…These advances have led to advantages such as the predictability of treatment, simplifying clinical steps, and quick and easy communication between different specialists (radiologists, implantologists, surgeons, prosthetists, and periodontists). In addition, treatment options, including digital workflow, are developing with new materials and technologies-3D for printing and milling structures [1,7]. The literature describes the mechanical advantages of using digital technologies from a biomechanical point of view: final restorations are produced according to the exact gingival architectonics of the patient, achieving an optimal emergence profile and a better aesthetic result for patients; it is also easier to correct the angulation of implants; Fewer patient visits are needed with a shorter visit time, greater comfort for the patient [8,9,10].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Study of individual healing abutment with standard impression and fully digital CAD-CAM healing abutment

Deliverska¹,

Kirilova²,

Kirov³

2023

MedInform

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Aim: This study compares the time for making prosthetic structures with individual abutments with standard impressions and fully CAD-CAM abutments. The null hypothesis is that there is no difference between the two groups studied. Materials and methods:Thirty implants from the Neo system (AlfaBio, Tel Aviv, Israel) placed on patients aged 30 to 50 years without concomitant diseases were examined. Two protocols were used for the abutment and prosthetic construction: fully digital CAD/CAM and standard. Results:The total time for fully CAD-CAM abutments and crown is statistically significantly less than the time to produce individual abutments with standard impression and prosthetic construction. Conclusion:The ability to design and manufacture customized abutments with precise anatomical shapes individually according to the clinical situation can reduce stress during chewing and help improve successful long-term aesthetic and functional outcomes.

show abstract

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

Cited by 6 publications

References 20 publications

Digitally prefabricated versus conventionally fabricated implant-supported full-arch provisional prosthesis: a retrospective cohort study

Digitally prefabricated versus conventionally fabricated implant-supported full-arch provisional prosthesis: a retrospective cohort study

Digitally prefabricated versus conventionally fabricated implant-supported full-arch provisional prosthesis: A retrospective cohort study

Study of individual healing abutment with standard impression and fully digital CAD-CAM healing abutment

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About