Clinical and radiographic outcomes of implant-supported fixed prostheses with cantilever extension in anterior mandible: A retrospective study

IF 4.8 1区医学 Q1 DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE Clinical Oral Implants Research Pub Date : 2024-06-11 DOI:10.1111/clr.14310

Siyuan Wang, Xiaoyu Chen, Zhaoting Ling, Yiwen Xie, Cong Chen, Xiaoting Shen, Fuming He

{"title":"Clinical and radiographic outcomes of implant-supported fixed prostheses with cantilever extension in anterior mandible: A retrospective study","authors":"Siyuan Wang, Xiaoyu Chen, Zhaoting Ling, Yiwen Xie, Cong Chen, Xiaoting Shen, Fuming He","doi":"10.1111/clr.14310","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Objectives</h3>\n \n <p>The objective of this study is to analyze the clinical and radiographic outcomes of implant-supported fixed protheses with cantilever extensions (ISFPCs) in the partially edentulous anterior mandible.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Materials and Methods</h3>\n \n <p>Patients who received anterior mandible implant restoration between January 2016 and December 2021 were included. Patients with two, three, or four continuous missing teeth receiving adjacent implant supported single-unit crowns (ISSCs), ISFPCs, implant-supported fixed protheses without cantilever extensions (ISFPNs) were divided into groups: ISSC+ISSC, ISFPC, ISSC+ISFPC, three-unit ISFPN, ISFPC+ISFPC, or four-unit ISFPN, respectively. We recorded and evaluated survival rates, mechanical and biological complications, peri-implant marginal bone loss (MBL), esthetic outcomes, and patient perceptions. Statistical analysis was performed using linear mixed models (LMM).</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Results</h3>\n \n <p>The study included 87 patients and 152 implants. No implant loss occurred during an average follow-up of 3.48 ± 1.85 years (range: 1–7 years). According to LMM models, prosthetic type had a statistically significant impact on MBL during follow-up periods, in favor of the ISFPC and ISFPC+ISFPC groups (0.16 ± 0.48 mm vs. 0.51 ± 0.49 mm, <i>p</i> = .034; 0.22 ± 0.49 mm vs. 0.60 ± 0.62 mm, <i>p</i> = .043, respectively). Mechanical and biological complications were relatively low and comparable. The four-unit ISFPC group had higher subjective esthetic scores compared with the ISSC+ISSC group (98.6 vs. 83.8, <i>p</i> < .05), and patients in the ISFPC+ISFPC group expressed greater satisfaction with cleanability than the ISFPN group (98.8 vs. 80.6).</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Conclusion</h3>\n \n <p>ISFPCs offer a highly predictable treatment option in the anterior mandible, characterized by high survival rates, and comparable complication rates, peri-implant bone stability and esthetics to adjacent ISSCs or ISFPNs.</p>\n </section>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":10455,"journal":{"name":"Clinical Oral Implants Research","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":4.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-06-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Clinical Oral Implants Research","FirstCategoryId":"5","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/clr.14310","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objectives

The objective of this study is to analyze the clinical and radiographic outcomes of implant-supported fixed protheses with cantilever extensions (ISFPCs) in the partially edentulous anterior mandible.

Materials and Methods

Patients who received anterior mandible implant restoration between January 2016 and December 2021 were included. Patients with two, three, or four continuous missing teeth receiving adjacent implant supported single-unit crowns (ISSCs), ISFPCs, implant-supported fixed protheses without cantilever extensions (ISFPNs) were divided into groups: ISSC+ISSC, ISFPC, ISSC+ISFPC, three-unit ISFPN, ISFPC+ISFPC, or four-unit ISFPN, respectively. We recorded and evaluated survival rates, mechanical and biological complications, peri-implant marginal bone loss (MBL), esthetic outcomes, and patient perceptions. Statistical analysis was performed using linear mixed models (LMM).

Results

The study included 87 patients and 152 implants. No implant loss occurred during an average follow-up of 3.48 ± 1.85 years (range: 1–7 years). According to LMM models, prosthetic type had a statistically significant impact on MBL during follow-up periods, in favor of the ISFPC and ISFPC+ISFPC groups (0.16 ± 0.48 mm vs. 0.51 ± 0.49 mm, p = .034; 0.22 ± 0.49 mm vs. 0.60 ± 0.62 mm, p = .043, respectively). Mechanical and biological complications were relatively low and comparable. The four-unit ISFPC group had higher subjective esthetic scores compared with the ISSC+ISSC group (98.6 vs. 83.8, p < .05), and patients in the ISFPC+ISFPC group expressed greater satisfaction with cleanability than the ISFPN group (98.8 vs. 80.6).

Conclusion

ISFPCs offer a highly predictable treatment option in the anterior mandible, characterized by high survival rates, and comparable complication rates, peri-implant bone stability and esthetics to adjacent ISSCs or ISFPNs.

查看原文

微信好友朋友圈 QQ好友复制链接

本刊更多论文

下颌前部悬臂延伸种植体支撑固定义齿的临床和放射学效果：回顾性研究。

研究目的本研究的目的是分析部分缺牙的前下颌种植体支撑悬臂延伸固定义齿（ISFPCs）的临床和影像学效果：纳入2016年1月至2021年12月期间接受前下颌骨种植修复的患者。将接受相邻种植体支持单体冠（ISSC）、ISFPC、无悬臂延伸种植体支持固定义齿（ISFPN）修复的两颗、三颗或四颗连续缺失牙患者分为几组：分别为 ISSC+ISSC、ISFPC、ISSC+ISFPC、三单位 ISFPN、ISFPC+ISFPC 或四单位 ISFPN。我们记录并评估了存活率、机械和生物并发症、种植体周围边缘骨质流失（MBL）、美学效果和患者感受。统计分析采用线性混合模型（LMM）进行：研究包括 87 名患者和 152 个种植体。在平均 3.48 ± 1.85 年（范围：1-7 年）的随访期间，没有发生种植体脱落的情况。根据 LMM 模型，修复体类型对随访期间的 MBL 有显著的统计学影响，ISFPC 组和 ISFPC+ISFPC 组更有利（分别为 0.16 ± 0.48 mm vs. 0.51 ± 0.49 mm，p = .034；0.22 ± 0.49 mm vs. 0.60 ± 0.62 mm，p = .043）。机械并发症和生物并发症相对较低，且具有可比性。与 ISSC+ISSC 组相比，四单位 ISFPC 组的主观美学评分更高（98.6 分 vs. 83.8 分，p 结论：ISFPC 具有高度可预测性：ISFPC为下颌骨前部提供了一种可预测性很高的治疗方案，其特点是存活率高，并发症发生率、种植体周围骨稳定性和美观度与邻近的ISSC或ISFPN相当。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

求助全文

约1分钟内获得全文去求助

来源期刊

Clinical Oral Implants Research 医学-工程：生物医学

CiteScore

7.70

自引率

11.60%

发文量

149

审稿时长

3 months

期刊介绍： Clinical Oral Implants Research conveys scientific progress in the field of implant dentistry and its related areas to clinicians, teachers and researchers concerned with the application of this information for the benefit of patients in need of oral implants. The journal addresses itself to clinicians, general practitioners, periodontists, oral and maxillofacial surgeons and prosthodontists, as well as to teachers, academicians and scholars involved in the education of professionals and in the scientific promotion of the field of implant dentistry.