Survival and complications of hybrid prostheses carried out at the Teaching Dental Clinic of the Universidad Peruana Cayetano Heredia between 2013 to 2016.

Authors

  • Karen Gabriela Araujo Guevara School of Dentistry, University Peruana Cayetano Heredia. Lima Peru
  • Katerine Miluska Villalba Villalba School of Dentistry, University Peruana Cayetano Heredia. Lima Peru
  • Edinson Antonio Díaz Sarabia School of Dentistry, University Peruana Cayetano Heredia. Lima, Peru. Academic Department of Dentistry Clinic, School of Stomatology, University Peruana Cayetano Heredia. Lima, Peru.

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.20453/reh.v32i3.4280

Keywords:

Survival, postoperative complications, prostheses, dental implants, mouth edentulous

Abstract

Hybrid prostheses in total edentulous patients have improved their quality of life, is essential to know survival and possible complications, to offer reliable treatment. Objectives: to evaluate and record the survival and complications of hybrid prostheses in total edentulous CDD-UPCH patients. Material and methods: descriptive study, observational, retrospective, cross-sectional. Medical records of 37 patients (45 prostheses) installed from 2013 to 2016 were reviewed, data were recorded in Microsoft®Excel2016 and exported to the StataV15 statistical program. A univariate percentage analysis was used for the survival rate and biomechanical complications, and chi2 or Fisher’s exact for the association with variables. Results: Survival (years) was higher: female sex, young patients, installed in upper arches, with early loading and having natural teeth as the antagonist. The most frequent biomechanical complications were: mucositis; being the same in both sexs and arches, with greater results in theolder adult and conventionally loaded prostheses that have mixed prostheses as antagonists; and screw loosening was greater in female patients, older adults with conventionally loaded prostheses and with mixed prostheses as antagonists, without significant differences according to the type of arch.Conclusions: 5-year survival was 84.91% and failure 15.09%. The most frequent biomechanical complications were mucositis and screw loosening, and no associations of survival and biomechanical complications were found with; sex, age group, type of antagonist, compromised arch and type of load.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Eccellente T, Piombino M, Piattelli A, D’Alimonte E, Perrotti V, Iezzi G. Immediate loading of dental implants in the edentulous maxilla. Quintessence Int. 2011; 42 (4):281-289.

Balarezo A. Prótesis sobre implantes en el edéntulo total. Lima, Perú: Editorial Savia; 2014.

The glossary of prosthodontic terms. J Prosthet Dent. 2005; 94:10-92. DOI: 10.1016/j.prosdent.2005.03.013

Testori T, Galli F, Fumagalli L, et al. Assessment of long-term survival of immediately loaded tilted Implants supporting a maxillary full-arch fixed prosthesis. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implant. 2017; 32: 904–911. 5. Gonzalez I, DeLlanos H, Brizuela A, et al. Complications of Fixed Full-Arch Implant-Supported Metal-Ceramic Prostheses. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2020; 17(12): 4250.

Priest G, Smith J, Wilson MG. Implant survival and prosthetic complications of mandibular metal-acrylic resin implant complete fixed dental prostheses. J Prosthet Dent. 2014; 111(6): 466-75.

Brånemark P-I. Osseointegration and its experimental background. J Prosthet Dent. 1983; 50:399-410.

Simon H, Yanase RT. Terminology for implant prostheses. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2003; 18:539-43.

Attard NJ, Zarb GA. Long-term treatment outcomes in edentulous patients with implant-fixed prostheses: the Toronto study. International Journal of Prosthodontics. 2004; 17:417–424.

Papaspyridakos P, Mokti M, Chen C, Benic G, Gallucci G, Chronopoulos V. Implant and prosthodontic survival rates with implant fixed complete dental prostheses in the edentulous mandible after at least 5 years: a systematic review. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res. 2014; 16(5): 705-17.

Kwon T, Bain P, Levin L. Systematic review of short- (5-10 years) and long-term (10 years or more) survival and success of full-arch fixed dental hybrid prostheses and supporting implants. J Dent. 2014; 42(10):1228-41.

Tallarico M, Meloni S, Canullo L, Caneva M, Polizzi G. Five-year results of a randomized controlled trial comparing patients rehabilitated with immediately loaded maxillary cross-arch fixed dental prosthesis supported by four or six implants placed using guided surgery. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res. 2016;18(5):965-972.

Maló P, de Araújo Nobre M, Lopes A, Ferro A, Gravito I. Complete edentulous rehabilitation using an immediate function protocol and an implant design featuring a straight body, anodically oxidized surface, and narrow tip with engaging threads extending to the apex of the implant: A 5-year Retrospective Clinical Study. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2016; 31(1):153-61.

Moraschini V, Velloso G, Luz D, Cavalcante DM, dos Santos Porto Barboza E. Fixed rehabilitation of edentulous mandibles using 2 to four-implants: A systematic review. Imp Dent. 2016;25: 435–444.

Salvi GE, Bragger U: Mechanical and technical risks in implant ̈ therapy. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2009; 24(Suppl):69-85.

Al-Omari WM, Shadid R, Abu-Naba’a L, et al: Porcelain fracture resistance of screw-retained, cement-retained, and screw-cement-retained implant-supported metal ceramic posterior crowns. J Prosthodont. 2010; 19:263-273.

Katsoulis J, Brunner A, Mericske-Stern R. Maintenance of implant-supported maxillary prostheses: A 2-year controlled clinical trial. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2011; 26: 648-656.

Bozini T, Petridis H, Tzanas K, Garefis P. A meta-analysis of prosthodontic complication rates of implant-supported fixed dental prostheses in edentulous patients after an observation period of at least 5 years. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2011; 26: 304–318.

Papaspyridakos P, Chen C-J, Chuang S-K, Weber H-P, Gallucci GO. A systematic review of biologic and technical complications with fixed implant rehabilitations for edentulous patients. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2012;27: 102–110.

Maló P, de Araújo Nobre M, Lopes A, Moss S, Molina G. A longitudinal study of the survival of All-on-4 implants in the mandible with up to 10 years of follow-up. J Am Dent Assoc. 2011;142(3):310-20.

Tartaglia GM, Maiorana C, Gallo M, Codari M, Sforza C. Implant-Supported Immediately Loaded Full-Arch Rehabilitations: Comparison of Resin and Zirconia Clinical Outcomes in a 5-Year Retrospective Follow-Up Study. Implant Dent. 2016;25(1):74-82.

McGlumphy EA, Hashemzadeh S, Yilmaz B, Purcell BA, Leach D, Larsen PE. Treatment of edentulous mandible with metal-resin fixed complete dentures: A 15-to 20-year retrospective study. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2019;30(8):817-825.

Balshi TJ, Wolfinger GJ, Alfano SG, Balshi SF. The retread: a definition and retrospective analysis of 205 implant-supported fixed prostheses. Int J Prosthodont. 2016; 29(2):126-31.

Papaspyridakos P, Barizan T, Kim YJ, et al. Implant survival rates and biologic complications with implant-supported fixed complete dental prostheses: A retrospective study with up to 12-year follow-up. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2018;29(8):881-893.

Published

2022-09-27

How to Cite

1.
Araujo Guevara KG, Villalba Villalba KM, Díaz Sarabia EA. Survival and complications of hybrid prostheses carried out at the Teaching Dental Clinic of the Universidad Peruana Cayetano Heredia between 2013 to 2016. Rev Estomatol Herediana [Internet]. 2022 Sep. 27 [cited 2024 Dec. 22];32(3):226-35. Available from: http://44.198.254.164/index.php/REH/article/view/4280

Most read articles by the same author(s)