These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: Two-year prospective follow-up of implant/tooth-supported versus freestanding implant-supported fixed partial dentures.
    Author: Akça K, Cehreli MC.
    Journal: Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent; 2008 Dec; 28(6):593-9. PubMed ID: 19146055.
    Abstract:
    The aim of this study was to compare the prosthetic outcomes of implant/tooth-supported three-unit fixed partial dentures (FPDs) with those of freestanding implant-supported FPDs after 2 years of function. Twenty-nine partially edentulous patients presenting with unilateral or bilateral distal-extension edentulous areas received FPDs and were followed for a minimum of 24 months. In all, 49 FPDs were fabricated. In 34 FPDs, implants were connected to teeth and thus the FPDs were categorized as mixed (m-FPDs), whereas 15 FPDs were supported by freestanding terminal implants (fs-FPDs). Evaluation of prosthetic parameters including mechanical complications was performed. Changes in marginal bone level (DeltaMBL) around implants in both treatment groups were measured on digitalized periapical radiographs. Neither loss of osseointegration of an implant nor intrusion of abutment teeth was recorded. All FPDs were functioning after 24 months. Mean DeltaMBLs of posterior implants supporting m-FPDs and fs-FPDs at 24 months were 0.189 mm and -0.285 mm, respectively, representing a significant difference (P < .05). Mean DeltaMBLs at the mesial and distal surfaces of anterior and posterior implants supporting fs-FPDs were similar (P > .05). In the treatment of short-span distal-extension edentulous areas, similar clinical outcomes may be obtained for implant- and tooth/implant-supported three-unit FPDs in the early stages of function.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]