A Retrospective 2‐Year Clinical Study of Immediate Prosthetic Rehabilitation of Edentulous Jaws with Four Implants and Prefabricated Bars. Issue 5 (30th November 2015)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Sannino, Gianpaolo; Bollero, Patrizio; Barlattani, Alberto; Gherlone, Enrico
• Is Part Of: Journal of prosthodontics. Volume 26:Issue 5(2017)
• Page Start: 387
• Page End: 394
• Publication Date: 2015-11-30
• Subjects: Acrylic resin restorations -- All‐on‐Four -- bar system -- dental implants -- immediate loading -- screw‐retained prosthesis; Prosthodontics -- Periodicals; Dental implants -- Periodicals; Dentistry -- Periodicals; 617.69
• DOI: 10.1111/jopr.12406
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 1059-941X

Abstract

Abstract: Purpose: The purpose of this retrospective investigation was to evaluate the use of a prefabricated bar system for immediately loaded implants placed and restored according to the All‐on‐Four concept with up to 24‐month follow‐up. Materials and Methods: A total of 51 patients (31 males and 20 females; mean age 63.4 years) presented with edentulous or partially edentulous jaws with severe atrophy of the posterior regions. All patients were treated with full‐arch fixed prostheses (28 maxillary, 34 mandibular) each supported by four implants (two vertical, two distally tilted). The implants were immediately loaded with screw‐retained full‐arch restorations. Each prosthesis was supported by a prefabricated metal bar combined with high‐density acrylic resin. Follow‐up visits were scheduled at 6, 12, and 24 months after initial prosthetic loading. Intraoral radiographs were obtained immediately after surgery and at each follow‐up visit by using a custom radiograph holder and parallel technique. Marginal bone levels were assessed using digital image analysis. Implant and prosthetic survival and success rates were evaluated. Patient satisfaction was further assessed using a 100‐mm visual analog scale (VAS). Data were compared by means of the Mantel‐Haenszel test. Results: No drop‐outs occurred. The overall implant survival rates were 100% and 98.38% for the vertical and tilted implants respectively. Two of the 62 definitive fixed prostheses were lost during the observation period due to implant failure. Since restoration replacement due to implant failure was not judged a prosthodontic failure according to the survival criteria provided in this study, the overall prosthetic survival rate was 100%. No statistically significant differences in marginal bone levels between vertical and tilted implants were detected at 24‐month follow‐up evaluation in either jaw. All participants were functionally and esthetically satisfied with their definitive restorations after 2 years functioning, as confirmed by the average VAS scores (masticatory function: 99.7; phonetic function: 99.5, esthetics: 99.2). Conclusions: The preliminary 24‐month results indicate that immediate loading of vertical and tilted implants using the evaluated prefabricated bar system may be a viable solution for edentulous jaw rehabilitation; however, more long‐term prospective clinical trials are needed to affirm the effectiveness of this surgical‐prosthetic protocol.