Survival and Success Rates of Soft-milled Cobalt-chromium-ceramic Full-arch Screw-retained Implant-supported Prostheses: a 2- to 7-year Follow-up Retrospective Study

Overview

Journal Clin Oral Investig

Specialty Dentistry

Date 2021 Feb 22

PMID 33616806

Citations 2

Authors

S Levartovsky

A Arieli

N Fridenberg

S Matalon

R Pilo

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

Objectives: To retrospectively assess implant and prosthesis survival and success and patient satisfaction in edentulous patients treated with soft-milled cobalt-chromium-ceramic full-arch screw-retained implant-supported prostheses (SCCSIPs) over a mean clinical follow-up period of 4 years.

Materials And Methods: Twenty-one edentulous patients, aged 47-80 years, underwent restoration with 27 SCCSIPs (210 implants, 349 crown units). After definitive prosthesis insertion, patients participated in a yearly dental check-up recall program, including clinical and radiographic examinations. All supporting implants were examined for biological and technical complications, and the restorations were evaluated using modified California Dental Association (CDA) criteria. Life table and Kaplan-Meier survival analyses were performed. Patient satisfaction regarding chewing, esthetics, comfort, and phonetics was evaluated using a visual analog scale (VAS).

Results: After a mean of 4 years, two implants (3.8%) failed, with no effect on prosthesis survival. The cumulative survival rate was 98.6% and 100% for implants and prostheses, respectively. The most frequent minor biological complication was soft tissue recession (11%). Porcelain fracture was the only major technical complication (0.6% of crown units), while the only minor technical complication was porcelain chipping (4% of crown units), which required only polishing. Overall, 66.7% of the prostheses were free of technical complications. Patient satisfaction was high to very high. Less satisfaction was noted with comfort due to soft tissue recession and food impaction.

Conclusions: Within the limitations of this study, we conclude that the survival and success rates of SCCSIPs in edentulous patients were excellent.

Clinical Relevance: SCCSIPs should be considered when planning metal-ceramic implant-supported restorations.

Citing Articles

Five years of radiographic evaluation for the peri-implant bone changes of all-on-four implant prostheses constructed from different framework materials using different digital construction techniques.

Mourad K, Rashed N, Altonbary G, Fattah Hegazy S BMC Oral Health. 2024; 24(1):910.

PMID: 39112988 PMC: 11308698. DOI: 10.1186/s12903-024-04642-7.

Outcomes and Complications of 33 Soft-Milled Cobalt-Chromium-Ceramic Full-Arch Screw-Retained Implant-Supported Prostheses: A Retrospective Study with up to 10-Year Follow-Up.

Heller H, Beitlitum I, Goldberger T, Emodi-Perlman A, Levartovsky S J Funct Biomater. 2023; 14(3).

PMID: 36976081 PMC: 10053464. DOI: 10.3390/jfb14030157.

References

Papaspyridakos P, Bordin T, Kim Y, DeFuria C, Pagni S, Chochlidakis K . Implant survival rates and biologic complications with implant-supported fixed complete dental prostheses: A retrospective study with up to 12-year follow-up. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2018; 29(8):881-893. DOI: 10.1111/clr.13340. View

Papaspyridakos P, Bordin T, Natto Z, El-Rafie K, Pagni S, Chochlidakis K . Complications and survival rates of 55 metal-ceramic implant-supported fixed complete-arch prostheses: A cohort study with mean 5-year follow-up. J Prosthet Dent. 2019; 122(5):441-449. DOI: 10.1016/j.prosdent.2019.01.022. View

Branemark P, Adell R, BREINE U, Hansson B, Lindstrom J, Ohlsson A . Intra-osseous anchorage of dental prostheses. I. Experimental studies. Scand J Plast Reconstr Surg. 1969; 3(2):81-100. DOI: 10.3109/02844316909036699. View

Morton D, Gallucci G, Lin W, Pjetursson B, Polido W, Roehling S . Group 2 ITI Consensus Report: Prosthodontics and implant dentistry. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2018; 29 Suppl 16:215-223. DOI: 10.1111/clr.13298. View

Barazanchi A, Li K, Al-Amleh B, Lyons K, Waddell J . Additive Technology: Update on Current Materials and Applications in Dentistry. J Prosthodont. 2016; 26(2):156-163. DOI: 10.1111/jopr.12510. View

Krug K, Knauber A, Nothdurft F . Fracture behavior of metal-ceramic fixed dental prostheses with frameworks from cast or a newly developed sintered cobalt-chromium alloy. Clin Oral Investig. 2014; 19(2):401-11. DOI: 10.1007/s00784-014-1233-2. View

Miyazaki T, Hotta Y, Kunii J, Kuriyama S, Tamaki Y . A review of dental CAD/CAM: current status and future perspectives from 20 years of experience. Dent Mater J. 2009; 28(1):44-56. DOI: 10.4012/dmj.28.44. View

Al Jabbari Y, Barmpagadaki X, Psarris I, Zinelis S . Microstructural, mechanical, ionic release and tarnish resistance characterization of porcelain fused to metal Co-Cr alloys manufactured via casting and three different CAD/CAM techniques. J Prosthodont Res. 2019; 63(2):150-156. DOI: 10.1016/j.jpor.2018.10.008. View

Jang S, Lee D, Ha J, Hanawa T, Kim K, Kwon T . Preliminary Evaluation of Mechanical Properties of Co-Cr Alloys Fabricated by Three New Manufacturing Processes. Int J Prosthodont. 2015; 28(4):396-8. DOI: 10.11607/ijp.4298. View

10.

Li K, Tran L, Prior D, Waddell J, Swain M . Porcelain bonding to novel Co-Cr alloys: Influence of interfacial reactions on phase stability, plasticity and adhesion. Dent Mater. 2016; 32(12):1504-1512. DOI: 10.1016/j.dental.2016.09.008. View

11.

Barazanchi A, Li K, Al-Amleh B, Lyons K, Waddell J . Adhesion of porcelain to three-dimensionally printed and soft milled cobalt chromium. J Prosthodont Res. 2019; 64(2):120-127. DOI: 10.1016/j.jpor.2019.05.007. View

12.

Kocaagaoglu H, Kilinc H, Albayrak H, Kara M . In vitro evaluation of marginal, axial, and occlusal discrepancies in metal ceramic restorations produced with new technologies. J Prosthet Dent. 2016; 116(3):368-74. DOI: 10.1016/j.prosdent.2016.03.013. View

13.

Daou E, Ounsi H, Ozcan M, Al-Haj Husain N, Salameh Z . Marginal and internal fit of pre-sintered Co-Cr and zirconia 3-unit fixed dental prostheses as measured using microcomputed tomography. J Prosthet Dent. 2018; 120(3):409-414. DOI: 10.1016/j.prosdent.2018.01.006. View

14.

Camacho Presotto A, Ricardo Barao V, Bhering C, Mesquita M . Dimensional precision of implant-supported frameworks fabricated by 3D printing. J Prosthet Dent. 2019; 122(1):38-45. DOI: 10.1016/j.prosdent.2019.01.019. View

15.

Michalakis K, Hirayama H, Garefis P . Cement-retained versus screw-retained implant restorations: a critical review. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2003; 18(5):719-28. View

16.

Kan J, Rungcharassaeng K, Bohsali K, Goodacre C, Lang B . Clinical methods for evaluating implant framework fit. J Prosthet Dent. 1999; 81(1):7-13. DOI: 10.1016/s0022-3913(99)70229-5. View

17.

Lee C, Huang Y, Zhu L, Weltman R . Prevalences of peri-implantitis and peri-implant mucositis: systematic review and meta-analysis. J Dent. 2017; 62:1-12. DOI: 10.1016/j.jdent.2017.04.011. View

18.

Heitz-Mayfield L, Salvi G . Peri-implant mucositis. J Periodontol. 2018; 89 Suppl 1:S257-S266. DOI: 10.1002/JPER.16-0488. View

19.

Albrektsson T, Zarb G, Worthington P, Eriksson A . The long-term efficacy of currently used dental implants: a review and proposed criteria of success. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 1986; 1(1):11-25. View

20.

Bengazi F, Wennstrom J, Lekholm U . Recession of the soft tissue margin at oral implants. A 2-year longitudinal prospective study. Clin Oral Implants Res. 1996; 7(4):303-10. DOI: 10.1034/j.1600-0501.1996.070401.x. View