-
The Journal of Oral Implantology Feb 2013An implant screw fracture is one of the common problems associated with the implant components. In some situations, it may not be possible to retrieve the fractured...
An implant screw fracture is one of the common problems associated with the implant components. In some situations, it may not be possible to retrieve the fractured implant screws. As a result, clinicians either remove the implant or the implant may need to be covered over with soft tissue. The salvage of an implant with a nonretrievable screw fragment may be highly beneficial to the patients. This report describes a technique to salvage an implant-supported single restoration that has a nonretrievable implant screw fragment.
Topics: Dental Implants, Single-Tooth; Dental Prosthesis Repair; Dental Prosthesis Retention; Dental Prosthesis, Implant-Supported; Dental Restoration Failure; Humans; Torque
PubMed: 21905895
DOI: 10.1563/AAID-JOI-D-11-00051 -
The Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry Mar 2019Many implant overdenture attachments accommodate divergent abutments. However, there can be instances where the denture base resin surrounding the abutment may impede...
Many implant overdenture attachments accommodate divergent abutments. However, there can be instances where the denture base resin surrounding the abutment may impede seating by binding on the axial surface(s) of the abutment. This article describes the use of a dental surveyor to aid clinicians in determining where the resin denture base might be preventing the seating of overdenture attachments. The surveyor can be used for judicious adjustment to allow optimal seating of the attachments.
Topics: Dental Abutments; Dental Implants; Dental Prosthesis, Implant-Supported; Denture Bases; Denture Retention; Denture, Overlay
PubMed: 30396710
DOI: 10.1016/j.prosdent.2018.04.023 -
The Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry Jun 2021Removing cement-retained implant-supported prostheses may be challenging for clinicians. A method combining a cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) and a digital scan...
Removing cement-retained implant-supported prostheses may be challenging for clinicians. A method combining a cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) and a digital scan with a virtual surgical planning software program is described to identify the perforation site of a cement-retained implant-supported prosthesis to locate the abutment screw.
Topics: Bone Screws; Cementation; Dental Abutments; Dental Implant-Abutment Design; Dental Implants; Dental Prosthesis Retention; Dental Prosthesis, Implant-Supported
PubMed: 32576371
DOI: 10.1016/j.prosdent.2020.03.035 -
The Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry Apr 2020The periodontal prosthesis is a successful retrievable fixed restoration provided for patients with a periodontally involved dentition who lack alternative fixed...
The periodontal prosthesis is a successful retrievable fixed restoration provided for patients with a periodontally involved dentition who lack alternative fixed options. However, its popularity has declined due to the introduction of dental implants, as well as the cost and complexity of fabrication. Nonetheless, this remains a viable option for patients who cannot undergo implant surgery. This clinical report describes the use of computer-aided design and computer-aided manufacturing (CAD-CAM) technology to streamline the fabrication of a periodontal prosthesis.
Topics: Computer-Aided Design; Dental Implants; Dental Prosthesis Design; Dental Prosthesis, Implant-Supported; Humans; Periodontal Prosthesis
PubMed: 31353115
DOI: 10.1016/j.prosdent.2019.02.021 -
The International Journal of... 2017The aim of this study was to determine the influence of selected cements, abutment heights, and aging on the retention of zirconia crowns on zirconia abutments.
PURPOSE
The aim of this study was to determine the influence of selected cements, abutment heights, and aging on the retention of zirconia crowns on zirconia abutments.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
Zirconia crowns and abutments (height: 4.0 or 5.5 mm) were sandblasted and retained using five different cements. Axial pull-off tests were performed after thermocycling or 3 days of water storage.
RESULTS
An increase in abutment height was associated with an increase in decementation force when permanent cementation was tested. The aging protocol showed that temporarily cemented crowns showed a significant retention decrease, while use of a permanent cement led to a moderate increase.
CONCLUSION
Only use of permanent cements ensures clinically adequate decementation forces.
Topics: Crowns; Dental Abutments; Dental Cements; Dental Prosthesis Design; Dental Prosthesis Retention; Dental Prosthesis, Implant-Supported; Dental Stress Analysis; In Vitro Techniques; Surface Properties; Zirconium
PubMed: 28267819
DOI: 10.11607/ijp.4994 -
The Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry Jul 2016Rehabilitating patients with a mandibulectomy defect is a challenging task as such surgical resections may result in discontinuity defects that pose functional,...
Rehabilitating patients with a mandibulectomy defect is a challenging task as such surgical resections may result in discontinuity defects that pose functional, esthetic, and psychological problems. A decreased denture-bearing area, increased interarch space, and lever action in such maxillofacial defects may cause problems with regard to retention, stability, and support of the prosthesis. Reducing the weight of the prosthesis helps to decrease the lever action and load on the residual alveolar ridge. This clinical report describes how a patient with a posterior segmental mandibulectomy was rehabilitated with a hollow cast partial dental prosthesis using a simplified technique with expanded polystyrene.
Topics: Dental Impression Technique; Dental Prosthesis; Dental Prosthesis Design; Dental Prosthesis, Implant-Supported; Denture, Partial; Female; Humans; Mandibular Osteotomy; Middle Aged
PubMed: 26911929
DOI: 10.1016/j.prosdent.2015.12.009 -
The Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry Aug 2008
Topics: Dental Prosthesis Design; Dental Prosthesis Repair; Dental Prosthesis Retention; Dental Prosthesis, Implant-Supported; Dental Restoration, Temporary; Denture, Complete; Denture, Overlay; Humans; Models, Dental
PubMed: 18672133
DOI: 10.1016/S0022-3913(08)60166-3 -
Journal of the American Dental... May 2017
Review
Topics: Ceramics; Crowns; Dental Porcelain; Dental Prosthesis Design; Dental Prosthesis, Implant-Supported; Dental Restoration Failure; Humans
PubMed: 28449752
DOI: 10.1016/j.adaj.2017.02.022 -
The Journal of Oral Implantology Jun 2012Implant-supported restorations can be secured to implants with screws (screw-retained), or they can be cemented to abutments which are attached to implants with screws... (Comparative Study)
Comparative Study Review
Implant-supported restorations can be secured to implants with screws (screw-retained), or they can be cemented to abutments which are attached to implants with screws (cement-retained). This literature review discusses the advantages and disadvantages of each method of retention from different aspects. These aspects include: ease of fabrication and cost, esthetics, access, occlusion, retention, incidence of loss of retention, retrievability, clinical prosthesis fit, restriction of implant position, effect on peri-implant tissue health, provisionalization, immediate loading, impression procedures, porcelain fracture, and clinical performance. Peer-reviewed literature published in the English language between 1955 and 2010 was reviewed using PubMed and hand searches. Since the choice of using either method of retention is still controversial, this review article offers some clinical situations that prefer one method of retention over the other. The review demonstrated that each method of retention has certain advantages and disadvantages; however, there are some clinical situations in which it is better to select one method of retention rather than the other.
Topics: Cementation; Dental Cements; Dental Implants; Dental Marginal Adaptation; Dental Occlusion; Dental Prosthesis Design; Dental Prosthesis Retention; Dental Prosthesis, Implant-Supported; Dental Restoration Failure; Esthetics, Dental; Humans
PubMed: 21091343
DOI: 10.1563/AAID-JOI-D-10-00146 -
Journal of Prosthodontics : Official... Jan 2014To systematically evaluate the survival and success of screw- versus cement-retained implant crowns. (Review)
Review
PURPOSE
To systematically evaluate the survival and success of screw- versus cement-retained implant crowns.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
The authors performed an electronic search of nine databases using identical MeSH phrases. Systematic evaluation and data extraction of the articles from 1966 through 2007 were completed by three reviewers and two clinical academicians. The major outcome variable was implant or crown loss, and the minor outcome variables were screw loosening, decementation, and porcelain fracture. Random effects Poisson models were used to analyze the failure and complication rates.
RESULTS
The initial search produced 26,582 articles. Of these, 577 titles and subsequently 295 abstracts were available for evaluation, with 81 full texts meeting the criteria for review. Data were extracted from 23 level one and two research studies. Fleiss' kappa interevaluator agreement ranged from almost perfect to moderate. Major failures included 0.71 screw-retained and 0.87 cement-retained failures per 100 years. Minor failures included 3.66 screw loosenings, 2.54 decementations, and 0.46 porcelain fractures per 100 years.
CONCLUSION
There is no significant difference between cement- and screw-retained restorations for major and minor outcomes with regard to implant survival or crown loss. This is important data, as clinicians use both methods of restoration, and neither is a form of inferior care.
Topics: Cementation; Crowns; Dental Porcelain; Dental Prosthesis Design; Dental Prosthesis Retention; Dental Prosthesis, Implant-Supported; Dental Restoration Failure; Humans
PubMed: 24382004
DOI: 10.1111/jopr.12128