Abstract
Objectives: The aim of this study was to evaluate the survival and compare the appearance of different mechanical and biological complications, in screw-retained and cemented-retained single-tooth implant-supported restorations localized in the molar mandibular region, over a period of 1 to 4 years. Material and Methods: A retrospective study was carried out with a total of eighty implant-supported restorations, which were placed in eighty patients for prosthetic rehabilitation of a mandibular molar. Forty patients were rehabilitated with a cemented-retained restoration and the other forty with a screw-retained restoration. The presence of the following complications was recorded for both types of prostheses: Fractures of the ceramic veneering, loosening screws, mucositis and peri-implantitis. Debonding of the restoration was analyzed in the cemented-retained restoration group. The clinical survival of crowns was analyzed with a Kaplan-Meier test and the clinical complications were compared, using a Student t test and Log-rank test. Results: 27 patients registered some complication. The average rate of complications was 37,5% for cemented-retained restorations and 30% for screw-retained restorations. The complications more common in the cemented-retained restoration were the presence of mucositis (14,87%), while in the screw-retained restorations was the loosening screw (20%). Student t test and Log-Rank test found significant differences (p=0,001) between the screw loosening and presence of mucositis. Conclusions: The cemented-retained restorations seem to prevent screw loosening, but the presence of cement seem to increase the complications around the soft tissues, however in the screw-retained restorations the presence of mucositis and peri-implantitis are lower than cemented-retained restorations. The incidence of fracture of ceramic veneering was similar in both groups. Key words:Screw-retained restorations, cemented-retained restorations, screw loosening, peri-implant diseases and fracture ceramic veneering.
Highlights
Single-tooth replacements with osseointegrated implants in the posterior mandibular sector has become a routine treatment instead of fixed dental restorations, showing good long-term survival results [1]
The cemented-retained restorations seem to prevent screw loosening, but the presence of cement seem to increase the complications around the soft tissues, in the screw-retained restorations the presence of mucositis and peri-implantitis are lower than cemented-retained restorations
The incidence of fracture of ceramic veneering was similar in both groups
Summary
Single-tooth replacements with osseointegrated implants in the posterior mandibular sector has become a routine treatment instead of fixed dental restorations, showing good long-term survival results [1]. The implant systems available offer various prosthetic solution for cemented and screw-retained single-tooth restorations, very little scientific information is available, comparing the pros and cons of both type of prostheses in similar conditions, there is not enough scientific evidence that one type of restoration is superior to the other. The purpose of this prospective study was to analyze and compare the presence of screw loosening, fracture of ceramic veneering, mucositis and peri-implantitis and the survival rate of cemented and screw-retained single-tooth posterior restorations in similar conditions. The debonding of the crown was analyzed for cemented-retained restorations
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Free) 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call
