Prosthetic Complications Affecting Single-Tooth Morse-Taper Connection Implants

Guided versus freehand single implant placement: A 3-year parallel randomized clinical trial

OBJECTIVES

The present parallel randomized clinical trial aimed to assess, after a 3-year follow-up period, whether the choice of surgical technique-either manual or guided-and of the operator - non-expert operator or skilled - can affect the stability of peri‑implant marginal bone levels in implants placed 1 mm sub-crestal.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Patients received platform-switched implants (Anyridge, MegaGen Implant Co., Gyeongbuk, South Korea) featuring a 5-degree internal conical connection and supporting single screw-retained fixed crowns. The implants were randomly assigned to be placed through a digitally static guided surgery procedure (Test group - GS) or a freehand surgical technique (Control Group - FH). A non-expert operator (fewer than 20 implants placed in his professional activity) was selected to perform procedures for the GS Group, while a skilled operator (with over 1000 implants placed in his professional activity) was chosen for the FH Group. Marginal bone level (MBL) was measured at prosthesis installation (t0) and at 1 (t1), 2 (t2) and 3 years (t3) of follow-up. Changes in MBL from t0 to t3 were analyzed through periapical radiographs. Moreover, MBL changes at all time points were correlated to different supra-crestal soft tissue heights (STH): less than 3 and ≥ 3 mm, respectively.

RESULTS

60 implants in 18 patients were examined, with 30 implants allocated to the GS group and 30 to the FH group. The difference in MBL change between the two groups was 0.11 ± 0.22 mm, which was not statistically significant (p = 0.61). At the time of prosthetic loading, the mean MBL for implants with STH less than 3 mm was 0.33 mm higher than implants with STH ≥ 3 mm, though this difference was not statistically significant (P = 0.065).

CONCLUSIONS

Digitally static guided implant placement, performed by a non-expert operator, does not limit marginal bone remodeling, when compared to a freehand procedure performed by an experienced operator.

CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE

After correct and careful planning, early marginal bone levels (MBL) around conical connection, platform-switched implants placed sub-crestally may be stable in time. Digital planning and surgery have the potential to assist non-expert clinicians in achieving implant placements with comparable outcomes to those performed by experts.

Implant-supported crowns with locking taper implant-abutment connection: A systematic review and meta-analysis

STATEMENT OF PROBLEM

Implant-supported single crowns are more prone to screw loosening than splinted prostheses. Therefore, the locking taper system, which has a screwless abutment, may perform better when associated with this type of rehabilitation. However, systematic reviews on this system are lacking.

PURPOSE

The purpose of this systematic review was to evaluate the clinical performance and complications of single crowns retained by the locking taper system.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

This systematic review was registered at the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO) under CRD42020189921. An electronic search was made in 5 databases and 3 other sources up to February 2021 to select prospective clinical studies evaluating the performance of single crowns retained by the locking taper system by using the outcomes implant survival, success rate, complications, marginal bone loss (MBL), and prosthesis success rate. Four meta-analyses grouped according to the follow-up intervals were performed. The risk of bias of the selected studies was evaluated by using the RoB 2 checklist for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and Downs and Black for uncontrolled studies.

RESULTS

Twelve studies were included: 9 prospective cohort studies and 3 RCTs. A survival rate of 99% (98% to 99%) and a success rate of 97% (92% to 99%) after 5 years were found. Of the total, 2.6% biological and 2.9% prosthetic complications were described. The prosthesis success rate was 97% (96% to 98%) after 5 years. An average of -0.73 mm (-0.93 to -0.52) was found for the MBL after 5 years. The risk-of-bias assessment showed 2 RCTs with high risk and 1 RCT with low risk of bias. Among uncontrolled studies, 2 were classified as poor and 7 as fair.

CONCLUSIONS

Single crowns retained by locking taper implants can be safely indicated based on the high survival and success rates achieved in the long term, the maintenance of bone level stability over time, and the low incidence of complications.

Accuracy analysis of robotic-assisted immediate implant placement: A retrospective case series

OBJECTIVES

This study aimed to investigate the accuracy of a robotic computer-assisted implant surgery (r-CAIS) for immediate implant placement.

METHODS

Patients requiring immediate implant placement in the maxillary anterior region were enrolled for r-CAIS. Before surgery, the patients underwent a cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) scan with a positioning marker. Virtual implant placement position and drilling sequences were planned. Following spatial registration and calibration, the implants were placed with the robotic system under supervision. A postoperative CBCT was taken to control the actual implant positions. The DICOM data of the virtually planned and the actually placed implant were superimposed and registered through the accuracy verification software of the robotic system. The accuracy was calculated automatically. The deviation at the mesial-distal, labial-palatal, and apico-coronal directions were recorded.

RESULTS

Fifteen patients with 20 implants were included. No adverse surgical events or postoperative complications were reported. The global platform, apex, and angular deviation were 0.75 ± 0.20 mm (95 % CI: 0.65 to 0.84 mm), 0.70 ± 0.27 mm (95 % CI: 0.57 to 0.82 mm), and 1.17 ± 0.73° (95 % CI: 0.83 to 1.51°), respectively. Moreover, the vertical platform and apex deviation were 0.50 ± 0.31 mm, (95 % CI: 0.35 to 0.64 mm) and 0.48 ± 0.32 mm, (95 % CI: 0.33 to 0.63 mm), respectively. All the placed implant positions were further labial and apical than the planned ones, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

High accuracy of immediate implant placement was achieved with the robotic system.

CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE

Our study provided evidence to support the potential of the robotic system in implant placement, even in challenging scenarios.

Clinical Performance of 170 Frictional Morse Taper Implants: 2 Years Follow-Up

This study evaluated the clinical survival rates of 170 Morse taper implants through clinical and mechanical parameters in different therapeutic approaches such as single crowns, fixed partial prostheses, and fixed full-arch prostheses. Patients referred to the Center on Education and Research on Dental Implants from May 2017 to July 2018 with the indication for dental implant therapy, aged >18 years, without periodontal disease, recent evidence of inflammatory activity or other oral disorders, current pregnancy, uncontrolled diabetes mellitus or heavy smoking habit were included in this study. After 12 weeks of healing since the implants were placed in the mandible and after 16 weeks following implants placed in the maxilla, patients returned to the Center for prosthetic rehabilitation. After implant therapy, all patients underwent periodical, clinical, and prosthetic examinations every 6 months. Prosthetic restorations involved 109 fixed reconstructions in function. Few prosthetic complications were reported (6.55%). Twenty implants were rehabilitated with cemented prostheses; from those, 1 crown suffered a loss in retention/decementation. Of the 148 implants rehabilitated with screwed-retained prostheses, 6.76% suffered prosthetic screw loosening. The cumulative implant survival rate was 98.2%. When peri-implant tissue health was evaluated, the keratinized mucosa band appeared related to peri-implant tissue stability. Thus, Morse taper implants represented a successful procedure for implant rehabilitation, with a high cumulative implant survival rate, low prevalence of biological and prosthetic complications, and good stability of peri-implant tissues over the assessed period.

Accuracy of freehand versus guided immediate implant placement: A randomized controlled trial

PURPOSE

This randomized controlled trial (RCT) aimed to compare the accuracy of immediate implant placement with freehand and static guided surgery.

METHODS

An RCT was conducted on 61 subjects who received a total of 80 dental implants. The enrolled patients were randomly allocated to two groups: freehand surgery (control group, n = 40 implants) and static guided surgery with R2Gate® (Megagen, Gyeongbuk, South Korea, test group, n = 40 implants). Crestal and apical deviations in both mesiodistal and buccolingual dimensions, as well as depth and angular deviations, were calculated by comparing the three-dimensional (3D) position of the implant in the planning software with the final implant position, revealed by an intraoral scan of the fixture after placement. The Mann-Whitney test was used for comparative assessment.

RESULTS

In the freehand group (control), crestal deviations of 1.13 ± 0.89 mm and 1.00 ± 0.76 mm were found in the mesiodistal and buccolingual directions, respectively, versus 0.34 ± 0.26 mm (p<0.001) and 0.37 ± 0.24 mm (p = 0.03) in the static guided surgery group (test). Apical deviation was also higher in the freehand group (control) than in the static guided surgery group (test) in the mesiodistal (4.04 ± 1.90 mm vs. 0.97 ± 0.55 mm, p = 0.04) and buccolingual directions (3.46 ± 1.82 mm vs. 0.94 ± 0.67 mm, p = 0.02). Freehand surgery had greater angular deviation (6.09° ± 3.23) compared to guided surgery (0.83° ± 0.53, p = 0.02). However, depth deviation was similar in the freehand surgery group (2.24 ± 1.58 mm) and static guided surgery group (0.66 ± 0.43, p = 0.09).

CONCLUSIONS

Immediate implant placement with static guided surgery demonstrated better accuracy than freehand surgery.

STATEMENT OF CLINICAL RELEVANCE

Guided implant surgery showed fewer deviations compared to freehand surgery in fresh extraction sockets; therefore, the use of static guides should be given preference over the freehand modality.

Anaerobic adhesives effect on counter-torque of abutment screws on implants with external hexagon and conical connections: An in vitro study

BACKGROUND

Abutment screw loosening is a common complication of implant supported prostheses, especially for single crowns. In engineering, anaerobic adhesives (AA) are used to provide chemical locking between screw surfaces, but their application in implantology remains unclear.

PURPOSE

The purpose of this article is to evaluate, in vitro, the effect of AA on counter-torque of abutment screws for cemented prosthesis on dental implants with external hexagon connection (EHC) and conical connection (CC).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Sample was composed by 60 specimens, 30 dental implants with EHC and 30 with CC. Abutments (transmucosal 3 mm straight universal abutment) were installed without AA (control group) or with application of AA with two different adhesive strength: medium strength (LOCTITE® 242) and high strength (LOCTITE® 277). The specimens were subjected to mechanical cycling at 37°C, with a load setting of 133 N, a 1.3 Hz frequency, and 1 200 000 cycles. The abutments were removed, and the counter-torque values were registered. Screws and implants were inspected using a stereomicroscope to verify the presence of residual adhesive and damage the internal structures. The data were analyzed using descriptive statistics and comparison tests (p < 0.05).

RESULTS

Comparing to the torque of installation, the medium strength AA kept the counter-torque values for CC implants and the high strength AA kept the counter-torque for EHC implants and increased for CC implants. In the intergroup comparisons, control group presented significantly lower counter-torque values than other groups, both for EHC and CC implants. High strength AA presented similar results to medium strength AA in the EHC implants, but in the CC implants presented higher counter-torque values. Damage in threads was more frequent in the groups that received high strength AA.

CONCLUSION

The use of AA increased the counter-torque of abutment screws, both in implants with EHC and CC.

Prosthetic complications of fixed dental prostheses supported by locking-taper implants: a retrospective study with a mean follow-up of 5 years

BACKGROUND

Restoration with locking-taper implants is a widely used methodology. However, conical connection systems such as locking-taper implant systems have rarely been examined. This study provides a retrospective investigation of locking-taper fixed restorations, mainly focusing on prosthetic complications.

METHODS

Patients undergo treatment with conical connected implants from 2008 to 2010 were examined. Preparation of the implant sites was performed according to the standard procedures for the Bicon system. Bone healing took over 6 months, and the prosthetic procedure was initiated thereafter. Integrated abutment crowns or gold porcelain crowns were used, and the prosthesis type was a single crown or a fixed dental prosthesis. Once the crown was in place, its occlusion was thoroughly checked and adjusted, and then the crown was glazed or finely polished. The Kaplan-Meier method was used to calculate the cumulative complication-free rates for 5 and 10 years. Additionally, a Cox regression model was used to identify the factors that independently influenced the results. Implant survival and marginal bone loss were also investigated.

RESULTS

A total of 392 patients who underwent 541 implants and 434 locking taper implant-based restorations from 2008 to 2010 were examined. The overall 5-year cumulative complication-free rate was 83.34%. The most common prosthetic complication was veneer chipping, with a frequency of 67.53%. According to the Cox regression model, the complication-free rate of integrated abutment crowns was significantly higher than that of gold porcelain crowns, that of molar regions was significantly higher than that of premolar regions, and that of females was significantly higher than that of males. Only three implant failures happened, and the mean marginal bone loss values at 1- year, 5-years and 10- years were 0.25 mm (95% CI ± 0.12), 0.40 mm (95% CI ± 0.03) and 0.51 mm (95% CI ± 0.05), respectively.

CONCLUSION

Veneer chipping was the most common complication with locking-taper implant-supported fixed restorations. The incidence of complications for IACs is significantly higher than that for GPCs. Age, location, and prosthesis type are not determinants of prosthetic complications. Besides, the long-term clinical effect of locking-taper implant can meet the clinical needs. The bone tissue level around the implant can maintain long-term stability.

Pull-off resistance of a screwless implant-abutment connection and surface evaluation after cyclic loading

PURPOSE

The aim of this study was to investigate to what extent cyclic load affects the screwless implant-abutment connection for Morse taper dental implants.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

16 implants (SICvantage max) and 16 abutments (Swiss Cross) were used. The screwless implant-abutment connection was subjected to 10,000 cycles of axial loading with a maximum force of 120 N. For the pull-off testing, before and after the same cyclic loading, the required force for disconnecting the remaining 6 implant-abutment connections was measured. The surface of 10 abutments was examined using a scanning electron microscope 120× before and after loading.

RESULTS

The pull-off test showed a significant decrease in the vertical force required to pull the abutment from the implant with mean 229.39 N ± 18.23 before loading, and 204.30 N ± 13.51 after loading (P<.01). Apart from the appearance of polished surface areas and slight signs of wear, no visible damages were found on the abutments.

CONCLUSION

The deformation on the polished abutment surface might represent the result of micro movements within the implant-abutment connection during loading. Although there was a decrease of the pull-off force values after cyclic loading, this might not have a notable effect on the clinical performance.

A Review of the Major Prosthetic Factors Influencing the Prognosis of Implant Prosthodontics

Background: The treatment plan of prosthetic restorations supported by dental implants requires comprehensive scientific knowledge to deliver prostheses with good prognosis, even before the implant insertion. This review aims to analyze the main prosthetic determinants of the prognosis of implant-supported prostheses. Methods: A comprehensive review of the literature was conducted with a PICO (Patient Intervention Comparison Outcomes) question: “For partially or complete edentulous subjects treated with implant-supported prostheses, which prosthetic factors could affect clinical outcomes?”. A literature search was performed electronically in PubMed (MEDLINE), Scopus and Cochrane Library with the following equation [PROGNOS * OR RISK] FACTOR IMPLANT DENTAL, and by hand search in relevant journals and throughout the selected papers. Results: This revision was carried out based on 50 papers focused on several prosthodontics-related risk factors that were grouped as follows: implant-connection, loading protocol, transmucosal abutments, prosthetic fit, provisionalization, type of retention, impression technique, fabrication technique, and occlusion. More than a half of the studies were systematic reviews (30%), meta-analysis (16%), or prospective evaluations of prosthesis with various kinds of events (18%). However, narrative reviews of literature (14%) and in vitro/animal studies (16%) were also found. Conclusions: The current literature provides insufficient evidence for most of the investigated topics. However, based on the accumulated data, it seems reasonable to defend that the best treatment approach is the use of morse taper implants with transmucosal abutments, recorded by means of rigidly splinted copings through the pick-up technique, and screwed by milled prosthesis occlusally adjusted to minimize functional overloading.

Artificial intelligence in fixed implant prosthodontics: a retrospective study of 106 implant-supported monolithic zirconia crowns inserted in the posterior jaws of 90 patients

Background

Artificial intelligence (AI) is a branch of computer science concerned with building smart software or machines capable of performing tasks that typically require human intelligence. We present a protocol for the use of AI to fabricate implant-supported monolithic zirconia crowns (MZCs) cemented on customized hybrid abutments.

Methods

The study protocol consisted of: (1) intraoral scan of the implant position; (2) design of the individual abutment and temporary crown using computer-aided design (CAD) software; (3) milling of the zirconia abutment and the temporary polymethyl-methacrylate (PMMA) crown, with extraoral cementation of the zirconia abutment on the relative titanium bonding base, to generate an individual hybrid abutment; (4) clinical application of the hybrid abutment and the temporary PMMA crown; (5) intraoral scan of the hybrid abutment; (6) CAD of the final crown with automated margin line design using AI; (7) milling, sintering and characterisation of the final MZC; and (8) clinical application of the MZC. The outcome variables were mathematical (quality of the fabrication of the individual zirconia abutment) and clinical, such as (1) quality of the marginal adaptation, (2) of interproximal contact points and (3) of occlusal contacts, (4) chromatic integration, (5) survival and (6) success of MZCs. A careful statistical analysis was performed.

Results

90 patients (35 males, 55 females; mean age 53.3 ± 13.7 years) restored with 106 implant-supported MZCs were included in the study. The follow-up varied from 6 months to 3 years. The quality of the fabrication of individual hybrid abutments revealed a mean deviation of 44 μm (± 6.3) between the original CAD design of the zirconia abutment, and the mesh of the zirconia abutment captured intraorally at the end of the provisionalization. At the delivery of the MZCs, the marginal adaptation, quality of interproximal and occlusal contacts, and aesthetic integration were excellent. The three-year cumulative survival and success of the MZCs were 99.0% and 91.3%, respectively.

Conclusions

AI seems to represent a reliable tool for the restoration of single implants with MZCs cemented on customised hybrid abutments via a full digital workflow. Further studies are needed to confirm these positive results.

Descriptive retrospective study analyzing relevant factors related to dental implant failure

Background

The objective of this retrospective descriptive study was to analyze the characteristics of incident reports provided by dentists while using a specific brand of dental implants.

Material and Methods

The study was carried out in collaboration with Oxtein Iberia S.L.®, with the company providing access to the incident database in order to evaluate the characteristics of incidents from January 2014 to December 2017 (a total of 917 over four years). The data sheet recorded different variables during each of the stages of implant treatment, from initial implant placement to subsequent prosthetic rehabilitation. These variables included age, sex, systemic pathologies, smoking habits, bone quality, implant type, prosthesis type, and type of load applied, among others. SPSS Statistics was used to perform statistical analysis of the qualitative variables (univariate logistic regressions, χ2 test, Haberman's adjusted standardized residuals).

Results

The total study sample consisted of 44,415 implants shipped from Oxtein® warehouses on the dates indicated, of which 917 implants (2.1%) were flagged due to reports of lack of primary stability, failed osseointegration, or implant failure within one year of placement. When analyzing incident reports, it was observed that 61.6% of incidents occurred in male patients, compared to 38.4% in female patients. The average age of patients in the reported cases was 56.12 ± 12.15 years. A statistically significant correlation was discovered between incidents of implant failure and tobacco use, diabetes, heart disease, poor oral hygiene, previous infection, poor bone quality, and bruxism (p < 0.05). A (statistically significant) higher rate of incidents was also observed in tapered, internal connection, Grade IV titanium, narrow, and short implants.

Conclusions

Analysis of these implants reveals a higher rate of complication in short, tapered, internal connection and narrow-diameter implants. These data can help and encourage clinicians to use the utmost surgical precautions when placing these implants.

Key words:Pharmacovigilance, Dental implant, Dental implant failure.

A Novel Full-Digital Protocol (SCAN-PLAN-MAKE-DONE®) for the Design and Fabrication of Implant-Supported Monolithic Translucent Zirconia Crowns Cemented on Customized Hybrid Abutments: A Retrospective Clinical Study on 25 Patients

Purpose: To present a novel, full-digital protocol for the design and fabrication of implant-supported monolithic translucent zirconia crowns cemented on customized hybrid abutments. Methods: The present retrospective clinical study was based on data from patients who had been treated with single Morse-taper connection implants (Exacone^®, Leone Implants, Florence, Italy) and were prosthetically restored with monolithic translucent zirconia crowns, cemented on customized hybrid abutments. The full-digital protocol (SCAN-PLAN-MAKE-DONE^®) consisted of 8 phases: (1) intraoral scan of the implant position with scanbody; (2) computer-assisted design (CAD) of the individual abutment (saved as “supplementary abutment design” in external folder) and temporary crown; (3) milling of the individual zirconia abutment and of the temporary polymethyl-methacrylate (PMMA) crown, with extraoral cementation of the zirconia abutment on the relative titanium bonding base, to generate an individual hybrid abutment; (4) clinical application of the individual hybrid abutment and cementation of the temporary PMMA crown; (5) two months later, intraoral scan of the individual hybrid abutment in position; (6) CAD of the final crown with margin line design on the previously saved “supplementary abutment design”, superimposed on the second scan of the abutment in position; (7) milling of the final crown in monolithic translucent zirconia, sintering, and characterization; and (8) clinical application of the final crown. All patients were followed for a period of 1 year. The primary outcomes of this study were the marginal adaptation of the final crown (checked clinically and radiographically), the quality of occlusal and interproximal contact points at delivery, and the aesthetic integration; the secondary outcomes were the 1-year survival and success of the implant-supported restoration. An implant-supported restoration was considered successful in the absence of any biological or prosthetic complication, during the entire follow-up period. Results: In total, 25 patients (12 males, 13 females; 26–74 years of age; mean age 51.1 ± 13.3 years) who had been restored with 40 implant-supported monolithic translucent zirconia crowns were included in this study. At delivery, the marginal adaptation was perfect for all crowns. However, there were occlusal issues (2/40 crowns: 5%), interproximal issues (1/40 crowns: 2.5%), and aesthetic issues (1/40 crowns: 2.5%). The overall incidence of issues at delivery was therefore 10% (4/40 crowns). At 1 year, one implant failed; thus the survival of the restorations was 97.5% (39/40 crowns in function). Among the surviving implant-supported restorations, three experienced complications (one loss of connection between the hybrid abutment and the implant, one decementation of the zirconia abutment, and one decementation of the zirconia crown). The success of restorations amounted to 92.4%. Conclusions: The restoration of single Morse-taper connection implants with monolithic translucent zirconia crowns cemented on customized hybrid abutments via the novel SCAN-PLAN-MAKE-DONE^® full-digital protocol seems to represent a reliable treatment option. However, further studies on a larger number of patients and dealing with different prosthetic restorations (such as implant-supported fixed partial prostheses) are needed to confirm the validity of this protocol.

Digital versus Analog Procedures for the Prosthetic Restoration of Single Implants: A Randomized Controlled Trial with 1 Year of Follow-Up

Aim

To compare the outcome of digital versus analog procedures for the restoration of single implants.

Methods

Over a two-year period (2014-2016), all patients who had been treated in a dental center with a single implant were randomly assigned to receive either a monolithic zirconia crown, fabricated with digital workflow (test group), or a metal-ceramic crown, fabricated with analog workflow (control group). All patients were followed for 1 year after the delivery of the final crown. The outcomes were success, complications, peri-implant marginal bone loss (PIMBL), patient satisfaction, and time and cost of the treatment.

Results

50 patients (22 males, 28 females; mean age 52.6±13.4 years) were randomly assigned to one of the groups (25 per group). Both workflows showed high success (92%) and low complication rate (8%). No significant differences were found in the mean PIMBL between test (0.39±0.29mm) and control (0.54±0.32mm) groups. Patients preferred digital impressions. Taking the impression took half the time in the test group (20±5min) than in the control (50±7min) group. When calculating active working time, workflow in the test group was more time-efficient than in the control group, for provisional (70±15min versus 340±37min) and final crowns (29±9min versus 260±26min). The digital procedure presented lower costs than the analog (€277.3 versus €392.2).

Conclusions

No significant clinical or radiographic differences were found between digital and analog procedures; however, the digital workflow was preferred by patients; it reduced active treatment time and costs. The present study is registered in the ISRCTN (http://www.isrctn.com/ISRCTN36259164) with number 36259164.