A retrospective comparison of clinical outcomes of implant restorations for posterior edentulous area: 3-unit bridge supported by 2 implants vs 3 splinted implant-supported crowns
10.4047/jap.2022.14.4.223
- Author:
Yuseung YI
1
;
Seong-Joo HEO
;
Jai-Young KOAK
;
Seong-Kyun KIM
Author Information
1. Department of Prosthodontics, Seoul National University Dental Hospital, School of Dentistry, Seoul National University, Seoul, Republic of Korea
- From:The Journal of Advanced Prosthodontics
2022;14(4):223-235
- CountryRepublic of Korea
- Language:English
-
Abstract:
PURPOSE:. To compare the clinical outcomes of two types of implant restoration for posterior edentulous area, 3-unit bridge supported by 2 implants and 3 implant-supported splinted crowns.
MATERIALS AND METHODS:. The data included 127 implant-supported fixed restorations in 85 patients: 37 restorations of 3-unit bridge supported by 2 implants (2-IB), 37 restorations of 3 implantsupported splinted crowns (3-IC), and 53 single restorations (S) as controls.Peri-implantitis and mechanical complications that occurred for 14 years were analyzed by multivariable Cox regression model. Kaplan-Meier curves and the multivariable Cox regression model were used to analyze the success and survival of implants.
RESULTS:. Peri-implantitis occurred in 28.4% of 2-IB group, 37.8% of 3-IC group, and 28.3% of S control group with no significant difference. According to the implant position, middle implants (P2) of the 3-IC group had the highest risk of peri-implantitis. The 3-IC group showed a lower mechanical complication rate (7.2%) than the 2-IB (16.2%) and S control group (20.8%). The cumulative success rate was 52.8% in S (control) group, 62.2% in 2-IB group, and 60.4% in 3-IC group. The cumulative survival rate was 98.1% in S (control) group, 98.6% in 2-IB group, and 95.5% in 3-IC group. There was no significant difference in the success and survival rate according to the restoration type.
CONCLUSION:. The restoration type was not associated with the success and survival of implants. The risk of mechanical complications was reduced in 3 implant-supported splinted crowns. However, the middle implants of the 3 implant-supported splinted crowns had a higher risk of peri-implantitis.
