Vincent J. J. Donker, Henny J. A. Meijer, Wim Slot, Arjan Vissink, Gerry M. Raghoebar
{"title":"One‐Piece Monolithic Zirconia Single Tooth Implant‐Supported Restorations in the Posterior Region: A 1‐Year Prospective Case Series Study","authors":"Vincent J. J. Donker, Henny J. A. Meijer, Wim Slot, Arjan Vissink, Gerry M. Raghoebar","doi":"10.1111/clr.14396","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ObjectiveTo assess the clinical, radiographic and patient‐reported outcome measures, and the success of screw‐retained one‐piece monolithic zirconia implant‐supported restorations in the posterior region during a 1‐year follow‐up.MethodsIn a prospective case series, 50 single molar sites in the posterior region of 41 patients with a minimum age of 18 years and sufficient bone volume for placing an implant (≥ 8 mm) and space for an anatomical restoration were included. Following prosthetic‐driven digital three‐dimensional treatment planning, a tissue‐level implant with an internal connection was inserted during a one‐stage surgical procedure. Three months later, the implant was restored with a screw‐retained one‐piece monolithic zirconia restoration. Clinical, radiographic and patient‐reported outcome measures, and restoration survival and success according to the modified USPHS criteria were assessed at baseline prior to and immediately after implant placement, and 1‐month and 1‐year after definitive restoration placement.ResultsAt the 1‐year follow‐up, 1 implant had been lost (implant survival rate 98%) hence, 49 restorations were evaluated. The restoration survival and success rates were 100% and 98%, respectively. Plaque, calculus, bleeding and suppuration on probing and peri‐implant inflammation were absent in most cases. The mean (<jats:italic>SD</jats:italic>) marginal bone level change between implant placement and the 1‐year follow‐up was −0.14 mm (0.27) on the mesial and −0.25 mm (0.31) on the distal side. The mean (<jats:italic>SD</jats:italic>) patient satisfaction (0–10) was 9.2 (0.8) at the 1‐year evaluation.ConclusionOne‐piece monolithic zirconia implant‐supported restorations exhibited favourable outcomes over 1 year in situ.Trial Registration: Registered in the National Trial Register (NL9059)","PeriodicalId":10455,"journal":{"name":"Clinical Oral Implants Research","volume":"20 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":4.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-23","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://doi.org/10.1111/clr.14396","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
ObjectiveTo assess the clinical, radiographic and patient‐reported outcome measures, and the success of screw‐retained one‐piece monolithic zirconia implant‐supported restorations in the posterior region during a 1‐year follow‐up.MethodsIn a prospective case series, 50 single molar sites in the posterior region of 41 patients with a minimum age of 18 years and sufficient bone volume for placing an implant (≥ 8 mm) and space for an anatomical restoration were included. Following prosthetic‐driven digital three‐dimensional treatment planning, a tissue‐level implant with an internal connection was inserted during a one‐stage surgical procedure. Three months later, the implant was restored with a screw‐retained one‐piece monolithic zirconia restoration. Clinical, radiographic and patient‐reported outcome measures, and restoration survival and success according to the modified USPHS criteria were assessed at baseline prior to and immediately after implant placement, and 1‐month and 1‐year after definitive restoration placement.ResultsAt the 1‐year follow‐up, 1 implant had been lost (implant survival rate 98%) hence, 49 restorations were evaluated. The restoration survival and success rates were 100% and 98%, respectively. Plaque, calculus, bleeding and suppuration on probing and peri‐implant inflammation were absent in most cases. The mean (SD) marginal bone level change between implant placement and the 1‐year follow‐up was −0.14 mm (0.27) on the mesial and −0.25 mm (0.31) on the distal side. The mean (SD) patient satisfaction (0–10) was 9.2 (0.8) at the 1‐year evaluation.ConclusionOne‐piece monolithic zirconia implant‐supported restorations exhibited favourable outcomes over 1 year in situ.Trial Registration: Registered in the National Trial Register (NL9059)
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.