¿Prótesis de implante dental atornillada o cementada?

Autores/as

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.33448/rsd-v10i15.23112

Palabras clave:

Implantes dentales; Prótesis dental de soporte implantado; Resorción ósea.

Resumen

Los implantes se han convertido en una alternativa viable en el campo dental, devolviendo la función, la estética y el confort al paciente. La elección del tipo de conexión final de la prótesis se basa en la situación clínica de cada caso y también en la preferência del profesional. Hay dos tipos de restauraciones protésicas que se utilizan habitualmente en implantología: prótesis cementadas y atornilladas; ambos con sus ventajas y limitaciones. El objetivo de este estudio fue analizar e identificar, a través de una revisión de la literatura, la relación de diferentes tipos de prótesis (cementadas y atornilladas) con la pérdida de hueso marginal periimplantario, así como correlacionar el tipo de prótesis utilizada con la tasa de supervivencia del implante. La decisión sobre qué sistema protésico utilizar comienza durante la etapa de planificación y puede implicar estética, oclusión, retención, efecto sobre los tejidos periimplantarios, además de otras complicaciones, que influyen en la tasa de supervivencia del implante. La pérdida de hueso marginal periimplantario es uno de los problemas relacionados con el fracaso tardío de los implantes osteointegrados, siendo una de las causas del fracaso, que puede resultar en la pérdida de la osteointegración. Por tanto, se concluye que la pérdida de hueso marginal periimplantario tiene una etiología multifactorial; Las prótesis atornilladas tuvieron más complicaciones biomecánicas, como el aflojamiento del tornillo y la fractura de cerámica, y las prótesis cementadas tuvieron más complicaciones biológicas que involucraron los tejidos periimplantarios.

Citas

Albrektsson, T., Zarb, G., Worthington, P., & Eriksson, A. R. (1986). The long-term efficacy of currently used dental implants: a review and proposed criteria of success. The International journal of oral & maxillofacial implants, 1(1), 11–25.

Brügger, O. E., Bornstein, M. M., Kuchler, U., Janner, S. F., Chappuis, V., & Buser, D. (2015). Implant therapy in a surgical specialty clinic: an analysis of patients, indications, surgical procedures, risk factors, and early failures. The International journal of oral & maxillofacial implants, 30(1), 151–160. https://doi.org/10.11607/jomi.3769

de Brandão, M. L., Vettore, M. V., & Vidigal Júnior, G. M. (2013). Peri-implant bone loss in cement- and screw-retained prostheses: systematic review and meta-analysis. Journal of clinical periodontology, 40(3), 287–295. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcpe.12041

Del'Acqua, M. A., Chávez, A. M., Compagnoni, M. A., & Molo, F., Jr (2010). Accuracy of impression techniques for an implant-supported prosthesis. The International journal of oral & maxillofacial implants, 25(4), 715–721.

Di Iorio, D., Sinjari, B., Feragalli, B., & Murmura, G. (2011). Biomechanical aspects in late implant failures: scanning electron microscopy analysis of four clinical cases. The journal of contemporary dental practice, 12(5), 356–360. https://doi.org/10.5005/jp-journals-10024-1059

Esposito, M., Hirsch, J., Lekholm, U., & Thomsen, P. (1999). Differential diagnosis and treatment strategies for biologic complications and failing oral implants: a review of the literature. The International journal of oral & maxillofacial implants, 14(4), 473–490.

Ferreiroa, A., Peñarrocha-Diago, M., Pradíes, G., Sola-Ruiz, M. F., & Agustín-Panadero, R. (2015). Cemented and screw-retained implant-supported single-tooth restorations in the molar mandibular region: A retrospective comparison study after an observation period of 1 to 4 years. Journal of clinical and experimental dentistry, 7(1), e89–e94. https://doi.org/10.4317/jced.51708

Firme, C. T., Vettore, M. V., Melo, M., & Vidigal, G. M., Jr (2014). Peri-implant bone loss around single and multiple prostheses: systematic review and meta-analysis. The International journal of oral & maxillofacial implants, 29(1), 79–87. https://doi.org/10.11607/jomi.3316

Francis, L.; Pillai, S.B.; Lylajam, S. (2018) Clinical and radiological evaluation of screw-retained and cement-retained single-implant restorations - A comparative study. International journal of oral care and research, 6 (2),60-66.

Gaddale, R., Mishra, S. K., & Chowdhary, R. (2020). Complications of screw- and cement-retained implant-supported full-arch restorations: a systematic review and meta-analysis. International journal of oral implantology (Berlin, Germany), 13(1), 11–40.

Gómez-Polo, M., Ortega, R., Gómez-Polo, C., Celemin, A., & Del Rio Highsmith, J. (2018). Factors Affecting the Decision to Use Cemented or Screw-Retained Fixed Implant-Supported Prostheses: A Critical Review. The International journal of prosthodontics, 31(1), 43–54. https://doi.org/10.11607/ijp.5279

Hamed, M. T., Abdullah Mously, H., Khalid Alamoudi, S., Hossam Hashem, A. B., & Hussein Naguib, G. (2020). A Systematic Review of Screw versus Cement-Retained Fixed Implant Supported Reconstructions. Clinical, cosmetic and investigational dentistry, 12, 9–16. https://doi.org/10.2147/CCIDE.S231070

Jung, R. E., Pjetursson, B. E., Glauser, R., Zembic, A., Zwahlen, M., & Lang, N. P. (2008). A systematic review of the 5-year survival and complication rates of implant-supported single crowns. Clinical oral implants research, 19(2), 119–130. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0501.2007.01453.x

Koller, C. D., Pereira-Cenci, T., & Boscato, N. (2016). Parameters Associated with Marginal Bone Loss around Implant after Prosthetic Loading. Brazilian dental journal, 27(3), 292–297. https://doi.org/10.1590/0103-6440201600874

Lee, A., Okayasu, K., & Wang, H. L. (2010). Screw- versus cement-retained implant restorations: current concepts. Implant dentistry, 19(1), 8–15. https://doi.org/10.1097/ID.0b013e3181bb9033

Lee, M. Y., Heo, S. J., Park, E. J., & Park, J. M. (2013). Comparative study on stress distribution around internal tapered connection implants according to fit of cement- and screw-retained prostheses. The journal of advanced prosthodontics, 5(3), 312–318. https://doi.org/10.4047/jap.2013.5.3.312

Lemos, C. A., de Souza Batista, V. E., Almeida, D. A., Santiago Júnior, J. F., Verri, F. R., & Pellizzer, E. P. (2016). Evaluation of cement-retained versus screw-retained implant-supported restorations for marginal bone loss: A systematic review and meta-analysis. The Journal of prosthetic dentistry, 115(4), 419–427. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.prosdent.2015.08.026

Linkevicius, T., Puisys, A., Vindasiute, E., Linkeviciene, L., & Apse, P. (2013). Does residual cement around implant-supported restorations cause peri-implant disease? A retrospective case analysis. Clinical oral implants research, 24(11), 1179–1184. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0501.2012.02570.x

Linkevicius, T., Vindasiute, E., Puisys, A., & Peciuliene, V. (2011). The influence of margin location on the amount of undetected cement excess after delivery of cement-retained implant restorations. Clinical oral implants research, 22(12), 1379–1384. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0501.2010.02119.x

Mombelli, A., & Décaillet, F. (2011). The characteristics of biofilms in peri-implant disease. Journal of clinical periodontology, 38 Suppl 11, 203–213. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-051X.2010.01666.x

Nissan, J., Narobai, D., Gross, O., Ghelfan, O., & Chaushu, G. (2011). Long-term outcome of cemented versus screw-retained implant-supported partial restorations. The International journal of oral & maxillofacial implants, 26(5), 1102–1107.

Piattelli, A., Scarano, A., Paolantonio, M., Assenza, B., Leghissa, G. C., Di Bonaventura, G., Catamo, G., & Piccolomini, R. (2001). Fluids and microbial penetration in the internal part of cement-retained versus screw-retained implant-abutment connections. Journal of periodontology, 72(9), 1146–1150. https://doi.org/10.1902/jop.2000.72.9.1146

Pjetursson, B. E., Tan, K., Lang, N. P., Brägger, U., Egger, M., & Zwahlen, M. (2004). A systematic review of the survival and complication rates of fixed partial dentures (FPDs) after an observation period of at least 5 years. Clinical oral implants research, 15(6), 667–676. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0501.2004.01120.x

Pye, A. D., Lockhart, D. E., Dawson, M. P., Murray, C. A., & Smith, A. J. (2009). A review of dental implants and infection. The Journal of hospital infection, 72(2), 104–110. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhin.2009.02.010

Quirynen, M., De Soete, M., & van Steenberghe, D. (2002). Infectious risks for oral implants: a review of the literature. Clinical oral implants research, 13(1), 1–19. https://doi.org/10.1034/j.1600-0501.2002.130101.x

Radaelli, M., Federizzi, L., Nascimento, G. G., Leite, F., & Boscato, N. (2020). Early-predictors of marginal bone loss around morse taper connection implants loaded with single crowns: A prospective longitudinal study. Journal of periodontal research, 55(2), 174–181. https://doi.org/10.1111/jre.12699

Romanos, G. E., Javed, F., Delgado-Ruiz, R. A., & Calvo-Guirado, J. L. (2015). Peri-implant diseases: a review of treatment interventions. Dental clinics of North America, 59(1), 157–178. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cden.2014.08.002

Sailer, I., Mühlemann, S., Zwahlen, M., Hämmerle, C. H., & Schneider, D. (2012). Cemented and screw-retained implant reconstructions: a systematic review of the survival and complication rates. Clinical oral implants research, 23 Suppl 6, 163–201. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0501.2012.02538.x

Sakka, S., Baroudi, K., & Nassani, M. Z. (2012). Factors associated with early and late failure of dental implants. Journal of investigative and clinical dentistry, 3(4), 258–261. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.2041-1626.2012.00162.x

Shadid, R., & Sadaqa, N. (2012). A comparison between screw- and cement-retained implant prostheses. A literature review. The Journal of oral implantology, 38(3), 298–307. https://doi.org/10.1563/AAID-JOI-D-10-00146

Sherif, S., Susarla, S. M., Hwang, J. W., Weber, H. P., & Wright, R. F. (2011). Clinician- and patient-reported long-term evaluation of screw- and cement-retained implant restorations: a 5-year prospective study. Clinical oral investigations, 15(6), 993–999. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00784-010-0460-4.

Silva, G. C., Cornacchia, T. M., de Magalhães, C. S., Bueno, A. C., & Moreira, A. N. (2014). Biomechanical evaluation of screw- and cement-retained implant-supported prostheses: a nonlinear finite element analysis. The Journal of prosthetic dentistry, 112(6), 1479–1488. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.prosdent.2014.06.010

Ueda, T., Kremer, U., Katsoulis, J., & Mericske-Stern, R. (2011). Long-term results of mandibular implants supporting an overdenture: implant survival, failures, and crestal bone level changes. The International journal of oral & maxillofacial implants, 26(2), 365–372.

Vigolo, P., Mutinelli, S., Givani, A., & Stellini, E. (2012). Cemented versus screw-retained implant-supported single-tooth crowns: a 10-year randomised controlled trial. European journal of oral implantology, 5(4), 355–364.

Wadhwani, C., Rapoport, D., La Rosa, S., Hess, T., & Kretschmar, S. (2012). Radiographic detection and characteristic patterns of residual excess cement associated with cement-retained implant restorations: a clinical report. The Journal of prosthetic dentistry, 107(3), 151–157. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-3913(12)60046-8

Wadhwani, C., Rapoport, D., La Rosa, S., Hess, T., & Kretschmar, S. (2012). Radiographic detection and characteristic patterns of residual excess cement associated with cement-retained implant restorations: a clinical report. The Journal of prosthetic dentistry, 107(3), 151–157. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-3913(12)60046-8

Publicado

02/12/2021

Cómo citar

PARIZE, G.; PESTANA, T. I. .; CARDOSO, R. F. .; KIM, Y. J.; PALLOS, D. . ¿Prótesis de implante dental atornillada o cementada?. Research, Society and Development, [S. l.], v. 10, n. 15, p. e503101523112, 2021. DOI: 10.33448/rsd-v10i15.23112. Disponível em: https://rsdjournal.org/index.php/rsd/article/view/23112. Acesso em: 17 jul. 2024.

Número

Sección

Ciencias de la salud