RT Journal Article
T1 Cemented and screw-retained implant-supported single-tooth restorations in the molar mandibular region: A retrospective comparison study after an observation period of 1 to 4 years
A1 Ferreiroa Navarro, Alberto
A1 Peñarrocha Diago, Miguel
A1 Pradíes Ramiro, Guillermo Jesús
A1 Sola Ruiz, María Fernanda
A1 Agustín Panadero, Rubén
AB Objectives: The aim of this study was to evaluate the survival and compare the appearance of different mechanical and biological complications, in screw-retained and cemented-retained single-tooth implant-supported restorations licalized in the molar mandibular region, over a period of 1 to 4 years.Material and methods: A retrospective study was carried out with a total of eighty implant-supported restorations, which were placed in eighty patients for prosthetic rehabilitation of a mandibular molar. Forty patients were rehabilitated with a cemented-retained restoration and the other  forty with a screw-retained restoration. The presence of the following complications was recorded for both types of prostheses: Fractures of the ceramic veneering , loosening screws, mucositis and peri-implantitis. Debonding of the restoration was analyzed in the cemented-retained restoration group. The clinical survival of crowns was analyzed with a Kaplan-Meier test and the clinical complications were compared, using a Student t test and Log-rank test.Results: 27 patients registered some complication. The average rate of complications was 37,5% for cemented-retained restorations and 30% for screw-retained restorations. the complications more common in the cemented-retained restoration were the presence of mucositis (14,87%), while in the screw-retained restorations was the loosening screw (20%). Student t test and Log-Rank test found significant differences (p=0,001) between the screw loosening and presence of mucositis.Conclusions: The cemented-retained restorations seem to prevent screww loosening, but the presence of cement seem to increase the complications around the soft tissues, however in the screw-retained restorations the presence of mucositis and peri-implantitis are lower than cemented-retained restorations. The incidence of fracture of ceramic veneering was similar in both groups.
PB José V. Bagán
SN 1989-5488
YR 2014
FD 2014-07
LK https://hdl.handle.net/20.500.14352/34013
UL https://hdl.handle.net/20.500.14352/34013
LA eng
NO Ferreiroa, A., M. Penarrocha-Diago, G. Pradies, Mf. Sola-Ruiz, y R. Agustin-Panadero. «Cemented and screw-retained implant-supported single-tooth restorations in the molar mandibular region: A retrospective comparison study after an observation period of 1 to 4 years». Journal of Clinical and Experimental Dentistry, 2015, e89-94. https://doi.org/10.4317/jced.51708.
DS Docta Complutense
RD 14 jun 2025