Literature DB >> 24382004

A systematic review of screw- versus cement-retained implant-supported fixed restorations.

Sami Sherif1, Harlyn K Susarla, Theodoros Kapos, Deborah Munoz, Brian M Chang, Robert F Wright.   

Abstract

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.
© 2013 by the American College of Prosthodontists.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Systematic review; cement-retained restorations; crown failure; decementation; implant failure; porcelain fracture; screw loosening; screw-retained restorations

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2013        PMID: 24382004     DOI: 10.1111/jopr.12128

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Prosthodont        ISSN: 1059-941X            Impact factor:   2.752


  11 in total

1.  Should the vent hole of posterior implant crowns be placed on the lateral surface? An in vitro study of the hydrodynamic feature of cement extrusion and retention ability.

Authors:  Sixian Ye; Huangjun Zhou; Xingyu Lyu; Hao Feng; Min Liu; Cai Wen
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2022-10-20       Impact factor: 3.752

2.  Stresses induced by one piece and two piece dental implants in All-on-4® implant supported prosthesis under simulated lateral occlusal loading: non linear finite element analysis study.

Authors:  Ahmed Mostafa Abdelfattah Mohamed; Mohamed Gamal Askar; Mahmoud El-Moutassim Bellah El Homossany
Journal:  BMC Oral Health       Date:  2022-05-22       Impact factor: 3.747

3.  Clinical Advantages and Limitations of Monolithic Zirconia Restorations Full Arch Implant Supported Reconstruction: Case Series.

Authors:  Joao Carames; Loana Tovar Suinaga; Yung Cheng Paul Yu; Alejandro Pérez; Mary Kang
Journal:  Int J Dent       Date:  2015-06-01

4.  Peri-implant conditions and marginal bone loss around cemented and screw-retained single implant crowns in posterior regions: A retrospective cohort study with up to 4 years follow-up.

Authors:  Jun-Yu Shi; Long-Fei Zhuang; Xiao-Meng Zhang; Lin-Feng Fan; Hong-Chang Lai
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2018-02-05       Impact factor: 3.240

5.  Influence of abutment design on retention of metal copings cemented to implants.

Authors:  Albano Porto da Cunha; Glauco Pereira Moysés; Ana Christina Claro Neves; Rafael Pino Vitti; Flávia Cardoso da Rosa Goulart; Laís Regiane da Siva-Concílio
Journal:  Acta Biomater Odontol Scand       Date:  2016-01-26

6.  Modified Glass Ionomer Cement with "Remove on Demand" Properties: An In Vitro Study.

Authors:  Shaza Bishti; Taskin Tuna; Garima Agrawal; Andrij Pich; Stefan Wolfart
Journal:  Dent J (Basel)       Date:  2017-01-23

Review 7.  A Systematic Review of Screw versus Cement-Retained Fixed Implant Supported Reconstructions.

Authors:  Mohamed Tharwat Hamed; Hisham Abdullah Mously; Saeed Khalid Alamoudi; Abou Bakr Hossam Hashem; Ghada Hussein Naguib
Journal:  Clin Cosmet Investig Dent       Date:  2020-01-14

8.  Management of Buccal Screw Access Hole Positioning for Implant Fixed Complete Dentures: A Report of Two Patients and a Proposed Decision Tree.

Authors:  Fawaz Alzoubi
Journal:  Case Rep Dent       Date:  2021-12-21

9.  Marginal Bone Loss around Implant-Retaining Overdentures versus Implant-Supported Fixed Prostheses 12-Month Follow-Up: A Retrospective Study.

Authors:  Odontuya Dorj; Chin-Kai Lin; Eisner Salamanca; Yu-Hwa Pan; Yi-Fan Wu; Yung-Szu Hsu; Jerry C-Y Lin; Hsi-Kuei Lin; Wei-Jen Chang
Journal:  Int J Environ Res Public Health       Date:  2022-02-03       Impact factor: 3.390

10.  Marginal bone loss around cement and screw-retained fixed implant prosthesis.

Authors:  Muhammad-Hasan Hameed; Farhan-Raza Khan; Robia Ghafoor; Syed-Iqbal Azam
Journal:  J Clin Exp Dent       Date:  2018-10-01
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.