Clinical and Radiographic Changes at Implants Supporting Fixed Partial Dental Prostheses With Cantilever Extensions. A Retrospective Study After at Least 10 Years of Loading

IF 5.3 1区医学 Q1 DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE

Clinical Oral Implants Research Pub Date : 2025-07-22 DOI:10.1111/clr.70000

Alexios Bakopoulos, Haralampos Petridis, Konstantinos Michalakis, Lazaros Tsalikis, Ioannis Vouros

{"title":"Clinical and Radiographic Changes at Implants Supporting Fixed Partial Dental Prostheses With Cantilever Extensions. A Retrospective Study After at Least 10 Years of Loading","authors":"Alexios Bakopoulos, Haralampos Petridis, Konstantinos Michalakis, Lazaros Tsalikis, Ioannis Vouros","doi":"10.1111/clr.70000","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Aim</h3>\n \n <p>To report clinical and radiographic changes at implants supporting Fixed Partial Dental Prostheses with Cantilever extensions (FPDPC's) after a loading time exceeding 10 years.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Materials and Methods</h3>\n \n <p>Patients with FPDPC's were reevaluated after a loading time of 10–21 years. A clinical and radiographic examination was conducted to assess Marginal bone level change (MBLc), biological, and prosthetic parameters. Pocket depth (PD), Attachment Level (CAL), Bleeding on Probing (BOP), and Presence of Plaque (PL) were also recorded.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Results</h3>\n \n <p>Nineteen patients with 21 FPDPC's supported by 47 implants were re-evaluated after a mean loading time of 13.3 ± 2.9 years (range: 10–21 years). Implant survival rate was 100% and implant success rate was 91.5%, accounting for 4 implants (8.5%) that presented with peri-implantitis. Twelve implants (25.5%) exhibited peri-implant mucositis. Three of the FPDPC's had to be replaced due to fracture of the cantilever teeth and one other FPDPC had abutment screw fracture which was corrected, leading to prosthetic survival and success rates of 86% and 81%, respectively. Mean MBLc from implant placement to time of re-evaluation was 0.99 ± 1.11 mm (95% CI: 0.67, 1.31, <i>p</i>-value < 0.001). Mean PD at re-evaluation was 3.9 ± 1.6 mm, mean CAL was 1.2 ± 1.6 mm. Percentages of BOP and PL were 14.89% ± 23.11% and 26.6% ± 30.625 respectively.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Conclusion</h3>\n \n <p>Fixed partial dental prostheses with cantilever extensions are a reliable option if extensive bone grafting or sinus lifts are to be avoided, with 10-year results showing 100% implant survival, 90% implant success, and 86% and 81% prosthetic survival and success rates, respectively.</p>\n </section>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":10455,"journal":{"name":"Clinical Oral Implants Research","volume":"36 10","pages":"1271-1286"},"PeriodicalIF":5.3000,"publicationDate":"2025-07-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/clr.70000","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Clinical Oral Implants Research","FirstCategoryId":"5","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/clr.70000","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

Aim

To report clinical and radiographic changes at implants supporting Fixed Partial Dental Prostheses with Cantilever extensions (FPDPC's) after a loading time exceeding 10 years.

Materials and Methods

Patients with FPDPC's were reevaluated after a loading time of 10–21 years. A clinical and radiographic examination was conducted to assess Marginal bone level change (MBLc), biological, and prosthetic parameters. Pocket depth (PD), Attachment Level (CAL), Bleeding on Probing (BOP), and Presence of Plaque (PL) were also recorded.

Results

Nineteen patients with 21 FPDPC's supported by 47 implants were re-evaluated after a mean loading time of 13.3 ± 2.9 years (range: 10–21 years). Implant survival rate was 100% and implant success rate was 91.5%, accounting for 4 implants (8.5%) that presented with peri-implantitis. Twelve implants (25.5%) exhibited peri-implant mucositis. Three of the FPDPC's had to be replaced due to fracture of the cantilever teeth and one other FPDPC had abutment screw fracture which was corrected, leading to prosthetic survival and success rates of 86% and 81%, respectively. Mean MBLc from implant placement to time of re-evaluation was 0.99 ± 1.11 mm (95% CI: 0.67, 1.31, p-value < 0.001). Mean PD at re-evaluation was 3.9 ± 1.6 mm, mean CAL was 1.2 ± 1.6 mm. Percentages of BOP and PL were 14.89% ± 23.11% and 26.6% ± 30.625 respectively.

Conclusion

Fixed partial dental prostheses with cantilever extensions are a reliable option if extensive bone grafting or sinus lifts are to be avoided, with 10-year results showing 100% implant survival, 90% implant success, and 86% and 81% prosthetic survival and success rates, respectively.

Abstract Image

查看原文本刊更多论文

悬臂延伸固定部分义齿种植体的临床和影像学变化。至少10年负荷后的回顾性研究

目的报告悬臂式部分固定牙种植体（FPDPC’s）在加载时间超过10年后的临床和放射学变化。材料和方法在10-21年的加载时间后对FPDPC患者进行重新评估。进行临床和影像学检查以评估边缘骨水平变化（MBLc），生物学和假体参数。同时记录袋深（PD）、附着水平（CAL）、探查出血（BOP）和斑块存在情况（PL）。结果19例患者共21颗FPDPC，共47颗种植体，平均加载时间为13.3±2.9年（范围：10-21年）。种植体成活率为100%，种植体成功率为91.5%，其中4例（8.5%）种植体出现种植体周围炎。12个种植体（25.5%）出现种植体周围粘膜炎。由于悬臂牙断裂，三颗FPDPC必须更换，另一颗FPDPC的基牙螺钉断裂被纠正，导致假体的存活率和成功率分别为86%和81%。从种植体植入到重新评估时间的平均MBLc为0.99±1.11 mm (95% CI: 0.67, 1.31, p‐value <；0.001)。重新评估时的平均PD为3.9±1.6 mm，平均CAL为1.2±1.6 mm。BOP和PL分别为14.89%±23.11%和26.6%±30.625。结论在避免广泛植骨或窦提升的情况下，悬臂式固定部分义齿是一种可靠的选择，10年的结果显示种植体成活率为100%，种植体成功率为90%，假体成活率和成功率分别为86%和81%。

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分钟内获得全文求助全文

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.