Marginal bone loss and the risk indicators of fixed screw‐retained implant‐supported prostheses and fixed telescopic‐retained implant‐supported prostheses in full arch: A retrospective case–control study. Issue 7 (7th April 2021)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Oda, Yukari; Mori, Gentaro; Honma, Shinya; Ito, Taichi; Iijima, Toshikazu; Yajima, Yasutomo
• Is Part Of: Clinical oral implants research. Volume 32:Issue 7(2021)
• Page Start: 818
• Page End: 827
• Publication Date: 2021-04-07
• Subjects: bone implant interactions -- clinical research -- clinical trials -- prosthodontics; Dental implants -- Research -- Periodicals; 617.69
• DOI: 10.1111/clr.13750
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 0905-7161

Abstract

Abstract: Objectives: This study compared full‐arch screw‐retained implant‐supported fixed dental prostheses (FSI‐FDPs) and full‐arch telescopic‐retained implant‐supported fixed dental prostheses with a professional retrieval system (FTI‐FDPs) on marginal bone loss (MBL), the risk indicators and peri‐implantitis rate after 7–13 years. Material and methods: Sixty five edentulous patients were treated with 86 prostheses and 592 implants. The FSI‐FDP group comprised 26 patients (32 prostheses, 202 implants), and the FTI‐FDP group comprised 39 patients (54 prostheses, 390 implants). MBL and the risk indicators of MBL ≥ 1 mm were assessed. Peri‐implantitis rates at 13 years were also calculated. Results: Full‐arch screw‐retained implant‐supported fixed dental prostheses and FTI‐FDP implants exhibited comparable mean MBLs of 0.60 ± 0.51 and 0.41 ± 1.03 mm, respectively. MBL ≥ 1 mm was noted for 25% of FSI‐FDP implants and 6.9% of FTI‐FDP implants. Superstructure–abutment connection (screw retention:FSI‐FDPs >telescopic retention:FTI‐FDPs) and implant–abutment connection (External butt joint, Internal butt joint >Morse taper joint) were associated with MBL ≥ 1 mm. Peri‐implantitis rates at the implant level were 3.99% (95%CI = 3.93–20.5) in FSI‐FDP group and 3.85% (95%CI = 3.85–34.3) in FTI‐FDP group with no significance. Conclusions: It was concluded that FSI‐FDP and FTI‐FDP implants exhibited comparable MBL; however, the risk of MBL ≥1 mm in FTI‐FDPs was lower than in FSI‐FDPs. Besides, implant–abutment connection was the risk indicator of MBL ≥1 mm. In peri‐implantitis rate, FSI‐FDPs and FTI‐FDPs behave similarly.