Screw- Versus Cement-Retained Implant Prostheses: A Systematic Review of Prosthodontic Maintenance and Complications

Ma, Sunyoung; Fenton, Aaron

doi:10.11607/ijp.3947

Cited by 72 publications

(51 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Dental cements are commonly used to attach the crown to an abutment. It has been shown that the method for crown attachment plays an integral role in the long‐term survival of an implant . Depending on the type of procedure, several commercial cement formulations differing in their chemical composition and material properties can be selected for crown and abutment restorations.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

In Vitro Evaluation of Cell Compatibility of Dental Cements Used with Titanium Implant Components

Marvin

Gallegos

Parsaei

et al. 2018

Journal of Prosthodontics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Despite previous studies that showed enhanced cpTi corrosion activity for fluoride-containing compositions (NIB and ZP), there was no significant difference in cytotoxicity between cement alone and cemented-cpTi. In general, the MC3T3-E1 preosteoblast cells were more sensitive than HGF cells to cement composition. Ultimately, cement composition played a significant role in maintaining host cell compatibility. Results of this work help illustrate the impact of different cement formulations on host cell health and emphasize the need for understanding material properties when selecting certain formulations of dental cements, which can ultimately influence the survival of dental implant systems.

show abstract

mentioning

confidence: 99%

In Vitro Evaluation of Cell Compatibility of Dental Cements Used with Titanium Implant Components

Marvin

Gallegos

Parsaei

et al. 2018

Journal of Prosthodontics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In the maxilla, implants were placed at 12 and 22 for the following reasons: to avoid the risk of dissimilar cervical soft tissue levels at sites 11 and 21, the presence of lack of labial bone at central 11 and 21 sites, and to avoid a cantilever restoration. [4041] In the mandible, implants were placed at canine site due to lack of bone width and an avoidance of narrow diameter implants at the incisor sites. [41] Temporary implant restoration was allowed for adequate soft tissue conditioning.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Restorative rehabilitation in a patient with sports trauma

Rashid

Vohra

Lillywhite³

2016

Eur J Dent

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Sports trauma frequently involves insult to oral soft and hard tissues resulting in loss of tooth structure and tooth loss. Multiple sporting equipment's are employed to prevent irreversible damage to oro-facial structures, and to reduce the overall cost of treatment. However in the undesired consequence of loss of oral structures, multiple treatment options are utilized to restore, esthetics, comfort and function. Osseointegrated implant supported rehabilitation of oral structures in trauma cases provides highly predictable treatment outcomes along with preservation of remaining tissues. This case report presents the management of avulsed teeth caused by hockey stick injury, with osseointegrated dental implant supported fixed partial dentures in esthetic zone using contemporary restorative techniques.

show abstract

“…The use of one or another retention system has long been discussed and still remains controversial among practitioners. There are not enough guidelines based on evidence-based clinical data to recommend a certain type of mechanism [2] and it seems to depend on the personal preferences and experience of the clinicians. Aesthetics, good mechanical environment, major passive fit, and occlusal control are the main advantages of a cement-retained implant-supported prosthesis, and the increased likelihood of peri-implantitis and the difficulty of retrievability are the main disadvantages.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Retention Strength after Compressive Cyclic Loading of Five Luting Agents Used in Implant-Supported Prostheses

Álvarez-Arenal

González-González

deLlanos-Lanchares

et al. 2016

BioMed Research International

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The purpose of this study was to evaluate and compare the retention strength of five cement types commonly used in implant-retained fixed partial dentures, before and after compressive cyclic loading. In five solid abutments screwed to 5 implant analogs, 50 metal Cr-Ni alloy copings were cemented with five luting agents: resin-modified glass ionomer (RmGI), resin composite (RC), glass ionomer (GI), resin urethane-based (RUB), and compomer cement (CC). Two tensile tests were conducted with a universal testing machine, one after the first luting of the copings and the other after 100,000 cycles of 100 N loading at 0.72 Hz. The one way ANOVA test was applied for the statistical analysis using the post hoc Tukey test when required. Before and after applying the compressive load, RmGI and RC cement types showed the greatest retention strength. After compressive loading, RUB cement showed the highest percentage loss of retention (64.45%). GI cement recorded the lowest retention strength (50.35 N) and the resin composite cement recorded the highest (352.02 N). The type of cement influences the retention loss. The clinician should give preference to lower retention strength cement (RUB, CC, and GI) if he envisages any complications and a high retention strength one (RmGI, RC) for a specific clinical situation.

show abstract

Screw- Versus Cement-Retained Implant Prostheses: A Systematic Review of Prosthodontic Maintenance and Complications

Cited by 72 publications

References 0 publications

In Vitro Evaluation of Cell Compatibility of Dental Cements Used with Titanium Implant Components

In Vitro Evaluation of Cell Compatibility of Dental Cements Used with Titanium Implant Components

Restorative rehabilitation in a patient with sports trauma

Retention Strength after Compressive Cyclic Loading of Five Luting Agents Used in Implant-Supported Prostheses

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About