Screw retained vs. cement retained implant-supported fixed dental prosthesis

详细信息    查看全文

• 作者：Julia-Gabriela Wittneben ; Tim Joda ; Hans-Peter Weber and Urs Brä ; gger
• 刊名：Periodontology 2000
• 出版年：2017
• 出版时间：February 2017
• 年：2017
• 卷：73
• 期：1
• 页码：141-151
• 全文大小：727K
• ISSN：1600-0757

文摘

A fixed dental prosthesis can be secured to an endosseous implant via cementation (using a provisional or definitive cement) on an implant abutment that is screw retained to the implant or directly in the implant via screw retention. The clinical decision as to which retention system best suits the individual patient depends on several factors. The aim of this review is to present a detailed overview of the factors potentially influencing whether to choose screw retention or cement retention. These factors include the individual indication, advantages and disadvantages of the different retention mechanisms, the retention provided, retrievability, provisionalization, esthetics and clinical performance, including failures and complications. The results of recently published systematic reviews on this topic are discussed and an overview is provided. A decision tree is presented to facilitate the clinical selection of the retention type. This overview concludes that the choice of retention type (screw retained or cement retained) might not influence the overall survival of the implant-supported fixed dental prosthesis, but may be responsible for the development of certain complications. The decision may depend on technical feasibility and on weighing the pros and cons.