Journal List > J Korean Acad Prosthodont > v.55(1) > 1034930

TOOLS
J Korean Acad Prosthodont. 2017 Jan;55(1):26-31. Korean.
Published online Jan 25, 2017.  https://doi.org/10.4047/jkap.2017.55.1.26
© 2017 The Korean Academy of Prosthodontics
Technical complications of cement-retained implant-supported single crowns and splinted crowns with zirconia frameworks
Sang-Choon You and Jung-Yoon Bae
Department of Prosthodontics, Gil Medical Center, Gachon University, Inchon, Republic of Korea.

Corresponding Author: Jung-Yoon Bae. Department of Prosthodontics, Gil Medical Center, Gachon University, 774-34, Namdongdae-ro, Namdong-gu, Inchon 21565, Republic of Korea. +82 (0)32 460 3376: Email: bb1018@hanmail.net
Received June 28, 2016; Revised September 01, 2016; Accepted September 02, 2016.

This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/) which permits unrestricted non-commercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.


Abstract

Purpose

This study was to assess clinically the success rates and technical complications of cement-retained implant-supported single crowns and splinted crowns with zirconia frameworks.

Materials and methods

75 (single crowns: 51, splinted crowns: 24) cement-retained implant-supported single crowns and splinted crowns with zirconia frameworks which were restored in 67 patients were investigated for the evaluation of the success rates and technical complications. All restorations were cemented with temporary cement. Age, gender, restoration position, opposing teeth, restoration type were assessed as possible factors affecting technical complications.

Results

During the mean observation period of 22.2 months, cumulative success rates of all restorations were 66.9 (73.2 - 60.6)%. Retention loss was found in 16 restorations (single crowns: 14, splinted crowns: 2), abutment screw loosening and veneer porcelain fracture were found in each 2 single crowns, respectively. According to a Kaplan-Meier survival analysis of single crowns and splinted crowns, the cumulative success rates were 58.9 (66.6 - 51.2)%, 87.5 (96.1 - 78.9)%, respectively. There was a statistically significant difference. The other possible factors did not have a significant effect on the technical complications.

Conclusion

Retention loss was the most frequent technical complication. Abutment screw loosening and veneer porcelain fracture were found rarely in single crowns only. Age, gender, restoration position, and antagonist did not have significant effect on the technical complications. Splinted crowns had a higher success rate than single crowns.

Keywords: Zirconia framework; Technical complications; Success rate

Figures


 Fig. 1
Kaplan-Meier survival curve for all restorations.
Click for larger image


Fig. 2
Kaplan-Meier survival curve for single and splinted crowns.
Click for larger image

Tables


 Table 1
Number and percentage of restorations and implants placed
Click for larger image


Table 2
Cumulative success rates for total restorations in % (CI-95 in brackets)
Click for larger image


Table 3
Incidence of complication in the two different types of restorations
Click for larger image


Table 4
General estimation equation model for the dependent variable “occurrence of technical complication”
Click for larger image

References
1. Vult von Steyern P, Ebbesson S, Holmgren J, Haag P, Nilner K. Fracture strength of two oxide ceramic crown systems after cyclic pre-loading and thermocycling. J Oral Rehabil 2006;33:682–689.
2. Hämmerle CH, Wagner D, Brägger U, Lussi A, Karayiannis A, Joss A, Lang NP. Threshold of tactile sensitivity perceived with dental endosseous implants and natural teeth. Clin Oral Implants Res 1995;6:83–90.
3. Heintze SD, Rousson V. Survival of zirconia- and metal-supported fixed dental prostheses: a systematic review. Int J Prosthodont 2010;23:493–502.
4. Guess PC, Att W, Strub JR. Zirconia in fixed implant prosthodontics. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res 2012;14:633–645.
5. Rangert BR, Sullivan RM, Jemt TM. Load factor control for implants in the posterior partially edentulous segment. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 1997;12:360–370.
6. Vanden Bogaerde L, Pedretti G, Dellacasa P, Mozzati M, Rangert B, Wendelhag I. Early function of splinted implants in maxillas and posterior mandibles, using Brånemark system tiunite implants: an 18-month prospective clinical multicenter study. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res 2004;6:121–129.
7. Balshi TJ, Hernandez RE, Pryszlak MC, Rangert B. A comparative study of one implant versus two replacing a single molar. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 1996;11:372–378.
8. Grossmann Y, Finger IM, Block MS. Indications for splinting implant restorations. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 2005;63:1642–1652.
9. Solnit GS, Schneider RL. An alternative to splinting multiple implants: use of the ITI system. J Prosthodont 1998;7:114–119.
10. Berglundh T, Persson L, Klinge B. A systematic review of the incidence of biological and technical complications in implant dentistry reported in prospective longitudinal studies of at least 5 years. J Clin Periodontol 2002;29:197–212.
11. Brägger U, Karoussis I, Persson R, Pjetursson B, Salvi G, Lang N. Technical and biological complications/failures with single crowns and fixed partial dentures on implants: a 10-year prospective cohort study. Clin Oral Implants Res 2005;16:326–334.
12. Krennmair G, Schmidinger S, Waldenberger O. Single-tooth replacement with the Frialit-2 system: a retrospective clinical analysis of 146 implants. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2002;17:78–85.
13. Palmer RM, Smith BJ, Palmer PJ, Floyd PD. A prospective study of Astra single tooth implants. Clin Oral Implants Res 1997;8:173–179.
14. Schwarz S, Schröder C, Corcodel N, Hassel AJ, Rammelsberg P. Retrospective comparison of semipermanent and permanent cementation of implant-supported single crowns and FDPs with regard to the incidence of survival and complications. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res 2012;14:e151–e158.
15. Chaar MS, Att W, Strub JR. Prosthetic outcome of cement-retained implant-supported fixed dental restorations: A systematic review. J Oral Rehabil 2011;38:697–711.
16. Zarb GA, Schmitt A. The longitudinal clinical effectiveness of osseointegrated dental implants: the Toronto study. Part II: The prosthetic results. J Prosthet Dent 1990;64:53–61.
17. Naert I, Quirynen M, van Steenberghe D, Darius P. A study of 589 consecutive implants supporting complete fixed prostheses. Part II: Prosthetic aspects. J Prosthet Dent 1992;68:949–956.
18. Binon PP, McHugh MJ. The effect of eliminating implant/abutment rotational misfit on screw joint stability. Int J Prosthodont 1996;9:511–519.
19. Korsch M, Walther W. Prefabricated versus customized abutments: A retrospective analysis of loosening of cement-retained fixed implant-supported reconstructions. Int J Prosthodont 2015;28:522–526.
20. Shillingburg HT, Hobo S, Whitsett LD, Jacobi R, Brackett SE. In: Fundamentals of fixed prosthodontics. 3rd ed. Chicago: IL: Quintessence Publishing; 1997. pp. 119-137.
21. Jorgensen KD. The relationship between retention and convergence angle in cemented veneer crowns. Acta Odontol Scand 1955;13:35–40.
22. Misch CE. In: Contemporary Implant Dentistry. 2nd ed. St. Louis: MO: Mosby; 1999. pp. 549-573.
23. Misch CE, Bidez MW. Occlusal considerations for implant-supported prostheses: Implant-protective occlusion. In: Misch CE, editor. Dental implant prosthetics. St. Louis, MO: Elsevier Mosby; 2005. pp. 472-510.
TOOLS
ORCID iDs

Sang-Choon You
https://orcid.org/http://orcid.org/0000-0003-1769-2181

Similar articles

Clinical outcome of double crown-retained implant overdentures with zirconia primary crowns

Maxillary cement retained implant supported monolithic zirconia prosthesis in a full mouth rehabilitation: a clinical report

Fracture resistance of implant- supported monolithic crowns cemented to zirconia hybrid-abutments: zirconia-based crowns vs. lithium disilicate crowns

Evaluation of reliability of zirconia materials to be used in implant-retained restoration on the atrophic bone of the posterior maxilla: A finite element study

Biomechanical three-dimensional finite element analysis of monolithic zirconia crown with different cement type