Effect of Cantilever Extension on Bone Loss in Mandibular Complete-Arch Implant-Supported Fixed Prostheses with Three and Four Implants.

Ana Larisse Carneiro Pereira, Clara Soares Paiva Tôrres, Maria de Fátima Trindade Pinto Campos, Laércio Almeida de Melo, Euler Maciel Dantas, Gustavo Augusto Seabra Barbosa, Adriana da Fonte Porto Carreiro
{"title":"Effect of Cantilever Extension on Bone Loss in Mandibular Complete-Arch Implant-Supported Fixed Prostheses with Three and Four Implants.","authors":"Ana Larisse Carneiro Pereira, Clara Soares Paiva Tôrres, Maria de Fátima Trindade Pinto Campos, Laércio Almeida de Melo, Euler Maciel Dantas, Gustavo Augusto Seabra Barbosa, Adriana da Fonte Porto Carreiro","doi":"10.11607/ijp.8347","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>To compare the peri-implant bone loss of mandibular complete-arch implant-supported fixed prostheses (FPSs) supported by three and four implants and to correlate with the size of the horizontal and vertical distal cantilever at prosthesis placement (T1) and after 1 year (T2).</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>A total of 72 external hexagon (EH) type implants were placed in 20 participants. Of these, 24 supported an FPS with three implants (G3I) and 48 with four implants (G4I). The mandibular implants were named 1, 2, 3, and 4 according to their location in the arch, in a clockwise direction. Digital periapical radiographs were taken at times T1 and T2 for analysis and measurement of peri-implant bone loss. The horizontal and vertical distal cantilevers were measured with a digital caliper and correlated with peri-implant bone loss.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The survival rate of implants in G3I was 91.66%, and in G4I it was 97.91%. The mean bone loss in G3I was 0.88 ± 0.89 mm, and in G4I it was 0.58 ± 0.78 mm (P = .225). There was no correlation between distal horizontal cantilevers and bone loss in the studied groups, with G3I being -0.25 (P = .197) and G4I -0.22 (P = .129). Larger vertical cantilevers of implants 1 (P = .018), 3 (P =.015), and 4 (P = .045) correlated with greater bone loss in G4I.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The number of implants in an FPS did not influence peri-implant bone loss after 1 year of follow-up. Larger vertical cantilevers influenced greater bone loss in complete-arch implant-supported fixed prostheses supported by four implants.</p>","PeriodicalId":94232,"journal":{"name":"The International journal of prosthodontics","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-06-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The International journal of prosthodontics","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.11607/ijp.8347","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Purpose: To compare the peri-implant bone loss of mandibular complete-arch implant-supported fixed prostheses (FPSs) supported by three and four implants and to correlate with the size of the horizontal and vertical distal cantilever at prosthesis placement (T1) and after 1 year (T2).

Materials and methods: A total of 72 external hexagon (EH) type implants were placed in 20 participants. Of these, 24 supported an FPS with three implants (G3I) and 48 with four implants (G4I). The mandibular implants were named 1, 2, 3, and 4 according to their location in the arch, in a clockwise direction. Digital periapical radiographs were taken at times T1 and T2 for analysis and measurement of peri-implant bone loss. The horizontal and vertical distal cantilevers were measured with a digital caliper and correlated with peri-implant bone loss.

Results: The survival rate of implants in G3I was 91.66%, and in G4I it was 97.91%. The mean bone loss in G3I was 0.88 ± 0.89 mm, and in G4I it was 0.58 ± 0.78 mm (P = .225). There was no correlation between distal horizontal cantilevers and bone loss in the studied groups, with G3I being -0.25 (P = .197) and G4I -0.22 (P = .129). Larger vertical cantilevers of implants 1 (P = .018), 3 (P =.015), and 4 (P = .045) correlated with greater bone loss in G4I.

Conclusions: The number of implants in an FPS did not influence peri-implant bone loss after 1 year of follow-up. Larger vertical cantilevers influenced greater bone loss in complete-arch implant-supported fixed prostheses supported by four implants.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
悬臂伸展对下颌全弧形种植体支撑的三种植体和四种植体固定假体骨质流失的影响
目的:比较由三颗和四颗种植体支撑的下颌全弓种植体支撑固定义齿(FPS)的种植体周围骨质流失情况,并将其与义齿植入时(T1)和一年后(T2)的水平和垂直远端悬臂大小相关联:20名参与者共植入了72颗外六方(EH)种植体。其中,24 人使用三个种植体支持 FPS(G3I),48 人使用四个种植体支持 FPS(G4I)。下颌种植体根据其在牙弓中的位置按顺时针方向分别命名为 1、2、3 和 4。在 T1 和 T2 时拍摄数字根尖周X光片,用于分析和测量种植体周围骨质流失情况。用数字卡尺测量远端水平和垂直悬臂,并将其与种植体周围骨质流失相关联:G3I种植体的存活率为91.66%,G4I为97.91%。G3I 的平均骨量损失为 0.88 ± 0.89 毫米,G4I 为 0.58 ± 0.78 毫米(P = 0.225)。研究组的远端水平悬臂与骨质流失之间没有相关性,G3I为-0.25(P = .197),G4I为-0.22(P = .129)。种植体 1(P = 0.018)、3(P = 0.015)和 4(P = 0.045)的垂直悬臂越大,G4I 的骨质流失越多:结论:随访一年后,FPS中种植体的数量并不影响种植体周围的骨质流失。较大的垂直悬臂会影响由四个种植体支持的全牙弓种植体支持固定修复体的骨质流失。
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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Digital Workflow for Rehabilitation of Severely Discolored Teeth Due to Red Staining from Endodontic Material. Influence of Different Cements on Bonding Efficiency Between Implant Abutment and Standard Restoration. Thirty-Year Clinical Performance of Double-Crown Retained Removable Partial Dentures - A Practice-Based Retrospective Study. Evaluation of the Bond Strengths Between Dental Ceramics and Co-Cr Frameworks Made with Digital and Conventional Techniques. 3D-Printed Permanent Resin Crowns on Pre-Molar and Molar Teeth; Two-Year Results of a Prospective Clinical Study.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1