Abstract
The cause of some peri-implant problems may be primarily attributable to the design
of the prosthesis. A screw-retained interim implant may be advisable for reversibility
and to avoid peri-implant cement, although screw retention may be difficult for maxillary
anterior implants with a labial angulation. In the treatment described, a interim
screw-retained crown was attached to a dynamic abutment with a lingual screw access
hole to obtain a correctly fitting restoration.
To read this article in full you will need to make a payment
Purchase one-time access:
Academic & Personal: 24 hour online accessCorporate R&D Professionals: 24 hour online accessOne-time access price info
- For academic or personal research use, select 'Academic and Personal'
- For corporate R&D use, select 'Corporate R&D Professionals'
Subscribe:
Subscribe to Journal of Prosthetic DentistryAlready a print subscriber? Claim online access
Already an online subscriber? Sign in
Register: Create an account
Institutional Access: Sign in to ScienceDirect
References
- Cement-retained versus screw-retained implant restorations: a critical review.Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2003; 18: 719-728
- Cemented versus screw-retained implant-supported single-tooth crowns: a 4-year prospective clinical study.Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2004; 19: 260-265
- Screw versus cemented implant supported restorations.Br Dent J. 2006; 201: 501-507
- A comparison between screw- and cement-retained implant prostheses. A literature review.J Oral Implantol. 2012; 38: 298-307
- Consensus report: reconstructions on implants. The third EAO consensus conference.Clin Oral Implants. 2012; 23: 238-241
- The influence of restorative procedures on esthetic outcomes in implant dentistry: a systematic review.Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2014; 29: 142-154
- Cemented versus screw-retained implant-supported single-tooth crowns: a 10-year randomised controlled trial.Eur J Oral Implantol. 2012; 5: 355-364
- Cement-retained versus screw-retained dental prostheses: Literature review.Dental Press Implantol. 2013; 7: 39-48
- A systematic review of screw- versus cement-retained implant-supported fixed restorations.J Prosthodont. 2014; 23: 1-9
- Screw retained vs. cement retained implant-supported fixed dental prosthesis.Periodontol 2000. 2017; 73: 141-151
- Cement-associated peri-implantitis: a retrospective clinical observational study of fixed implant-supported restorations using a methacrylate cement.Clin Oral Implants Res. 2014; 25: 797-802
- Cement-associated signs of inflammation: retrospective analysis of the effect of excess cement on peri-implant tissue.Int J Prosthodont. 2015; 28: 11-18
- Complications associated with excess cement around crowns on osseointegrated implants: a clinical report.Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 1999; 14: 865-868
- Radiographic detection and characteristic patterns of residual excess cement associated with cement-retained implant restorations: a clinical report.J Prosthet Dent. 2012; 107: 151-157
- The positive relationship between excess cement and peri-implant disease: a prospective clinical endoscopic study.J Periodontol. 2009; 80: 1388-1392
- The influence of margin location on the amount of undetected cement excess after delivery of cement-retained implant restorations.Clin Oral Implants Res. 2011; 22: 1379-1384
- The influence of the cementation margin position on the amount of undetected cement. A prospective clinical study.Clin Oral Implants Res. 2013; 24: 71-76
- Clinical factors influencing removal of the cement excess in implant-supported restorations.Clin Implant Dent Relat Res. 2015; 17: 771-778
- Technique for controlling the cement for an implant crown.J Prosthet Dent. 2009; 102: 57-58
- Effects of a cementing technique in addition to luting agent on the uniaxial retention force of a single-tooth implant-supported restoration: an in vitro study.Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2010; 25: 1145-1152
- Evaluation of the amount of excess cement around the margins of cement-retained dental implant restorations: the effect of the cement application method.J Prosthet Dent. 2013; 109: 216-221
- Clinical evaluation of an improved cementation technique for implant-supported restorations: a randomized controlled trial.Clin Oral Implants Res. 2016; 27: 1492-1499
- Cement removal from restorations luted to titanium abutments with simulated subgingival margins.J Prosthet Dent. 1997; 78: 43-47
- The use of digital photographs to locate implant abutment screws for implant-supported cement retained restorations.J Prosthet Dent. 2008; 100: 238-239
- An alternative method for registering the abutment screw position of cement-retained implant restorations.J Prosthet Dent. 2014; 112: 1304-1305
- A method for registering the abutment screw position of cement-retained implant restorations.J Prosthet Dent. 2010; 104: 60-62
- A three-dimensional image-superimposition CAD/CAM technique to record the position and angulation of the implant abutment screw access channel.J Prosthet Dent. 2013; 109: 57-60
- A technique for repairing a loosening abutment screw for a cement-retained implant prosthesis.J Prosthodont. 2011; 20: 652-655
- Simple device for locating the abutment screw position of a cement-retained implant restoration.J Prosthet Dent. 2013; 109: 272-274
- Cemented versus screw-retained implant prostheses: which is better?.Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 1999; 14: 137-141
- Dynamic abutment: a method of redirecting screw access for implant-supported restorations: technical details and a clinical report.J Prosthetic Dent. 2015; 113: 516-519
- Cleaning, disinfection, and sterilization protocols employed for customized implant abutments: an international survey of 100 universities worldwide.Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2017; 32: 774-778
- Interaction of chlorhexidine with smooth and rough types of titanium surfaces.J Periodontol. 2006; 77: 1194-1200
- A radiograph positioning technique to evaluate prosthetic misfit and bone loss around implants.J Prosthet Dent. 2014; 111: 163-165
- Assessing fit at the implant-abutment junction with a radiographic device that does not require access to the implant body.J Prosthet Dent. 2014; 112: 817-823
Article info
Publication history
Published online: May 25, 2018
Identification
Copyright
© 2018 by the Editorial Council for The Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry.
