Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Review
. 2018 Jul-Sep;18(3):201-211.
doi: 10.4103/jips.jips_25_18.

Retention failures in cement- and screw-retained fixed restorations on dental implants in partially edentulous arches: A systematic review with meta-analysis

Jatin K Jain  1 , Rajesh Sethuraman  1 , Sameer Chauhan  1 , Piyush Javiya  1 , Shreya Srivastava  1 , Rutvik Patel  1 , Bhagyashri Bhalani  2
Affiliations
Review

Retention failures in cement- and screw-retained fixed restorations on dental implants in partially edentulous arches: A systematic review with meta-analysis

Jatin K Jain et al. J Indian Prosthodont Soc. 2018 Jul-Sep.

Abstract

Purpose: This systematic review aimed to evaluate retention failures in cement- and screw-retained fixed restorations on dental implants in partially edentulous arches.

Methods: The relevant articles were retrieved from MEDLINE (PubMed), Cochrane Library, and EBSCO electronic databases for articles published from January 1995 to January 2016 and were restricted to randomized controlled trials and retrospective and prospective studies on human subjects that were reported in English. A further hand search was conducted on individual journals and reference list of the articles found. Reviewed studies which reported retention failures in fixed implant-supported prostheses using screw and cement retention mechanism. Information on the type and nature of restoration, as well as different luting cement, were also collected.

Results: Thirty-three articles were finalized, 20 short-term clinical studies (up to 5 years) and 13 long-term studies (≥5 years). Out of 33 studies, 16 studies were included in meta-analysis, 8 in short-term and 8 in long-term studies. The results of the meta-analysis for short-term studies showed statistically significant difference between cement-retained and screw-retained prosthesis, with the forest plot favoring cement-retained prostheses (risk ratio [RR]: 0.26; confidence interval [CI]: 0.09-0.74; P < 0.0001; I2 = 79%). In long-term studies, the forest plot revealed statistically significant difference between both retention systems favoring cement-retained prostheses (RR: 0.31; CI: 0.13-0.76; P = 0.03; I2 = 56%).

Conclusion: Analysis of the short- and long-term studies shows lesser retention failures with cement-retained prostheses when compared to screw-retained prostheses. Further, multicentric, high-quality randomized controlled studies with long-term observations and modified cementation protocols can yield higher grades of recommendation to avoid retention failures.

Keywords: Cement retained; fixed implant restorations; meta-analysis; retention loss; screw retained; systematic review; technical/mechanical complications.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

There are no conflicts of interest.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Flowchart of search strategy
Figure 2
Figure 2
Forest plot showing comparison between failures in cement- and screw-retained prosthesis up to 5 years of observation period
Figure 3
Figure 3
Forest plot showing comparison between failures in cement- and screw-retained prosthesis more than 5 years of observation period
See this image and copyright information in PMC

Similar articles

See all similar articles

Cited by

See all "Cited by" articles

References

    1. Attard NJ, Zarb GA. Implant prosthodontic management of partially edentulous patients missing posterior teeth: The Toronto experience. J Prosthet Dent. 2003;89:352–9. - PubMed
    1. Belser UC, Grütter L, Vailati F, Bornstein MM, Weber HP, Buser D, et al. Outcome evaluation of early placed maxillary anterior single-tooth implants using objective esthetic criteria: A cross-sectional, retrospective study in 45 patients with a 2- to 4-year follow-up using pink and white esthetic scores. J Periodontol. 2009;80:140–51. - PubMed
    1. Jung RE, Zembic A, Pjetursson BE, Zwahlen M, Thoma DS. Systematic review of the survival rate and the incidence of biological, technical, and aesthetic complications of single crowns on implants reported in longitudinal studies with a mean follow-up of 5 years. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2012;23:2–21. - PubMed
    1. Laney WR, editor. Glossary of Oral and Maxillofacial Implants. Berlin: Quintessence; 2008. - PubMed
    1. Sailer I, Mühlemann S, Zwahlen M, Hämmerle CH, Schneider D. Cemented and screw-retained implant reconstructions: A systematic review of the survival and complication rates. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2012;23(Suppl 6):163–201. - PubMed

LinkOut - more resources