Evaluation of Marginal Bone Loss and Esthetics in Screw vs Cement-retained Single Implant Prosthesis: A Systematic Review
- PMID: 40254877
- DOI: 10.5005/jp-journals-10024-3742
Evaluation of Marginal Bone Loss and Esthetics in Screw vs Cement-retained Single Implant Prosthesis: A Systematic Review
Abstract
Purpose: The aim of this systematic review was to evaluate marginal bone loss and esthetics in single implant zirconia prostheses of screw- and cement-retained prosthesis.
Materials and methods: An electronic search on MEDLINE/PubMed, Google Scholar, Scopus, Embase, Web of Science was conducted to identify randomized controlled clinical trials (RCTs) published within the past five years from 2018 upto January 2023. Additionally, a manual search of relevant references was performed. Two reviewers independently selected studies based on predefined inclusion criteria. Marginal bone loss values and esthetic parameters were extracted, and meta-analysis was conducted where applicable.
Results: The initial search yielded 61 articles, of which nine articles were thoroughly analyzed, resulting in five RCTs which were included. Due to limited available data on esthetic parameters, meta-analysis could not be performed. However, 164 implants revealed that screw-retained implant restorations were more likely to retain screws than cemented ones after one year (z-test value = 3.18, p = 0.001), with a mean difference of -0.30 (95% CI).
Conclusion: Marginal bone loss around implants was lower in screw-retained prostheses compared to cement-retained ones. These findings support the preference for zirconia prostheses in esthetically demanding cases.
Clinical significance: Screw-retained ceramic prosthesis exhibit optimal esthetics and minimal marginal bone loss. Cement-retained prosthesis fail in terms of marginal bone loss and esthetics due to excess cement around the prostheses. Inadvertence of excess cement removal around implant prosthesis led to inflammation of peri-implant tissue, which consequently increased probing depth. A stringent protocol in the procedure of cementation of prosthesis aids in the removal of excess cement, which reduces marginal bone loss and enhances esthetic. How to cite this article: Sajjanar J, Mohite V, Benakatti V, et al. Evaluation of Marginal Bone Loss and Esthetics in Screw vs Cement-retained Single Implant Prosthesis: A Systematic Review. J Contemp Dent Pract 2025;26(1):103-109.
Keywords: Cement-retained implant prosthesis; Esthetics; Marginal bone loss Screw-retained implant prosthesis..
Similar articles
-
Evaluation of cement-retained versus screw-retained implant-supported restorations for marginal bone loss: A systematic review and meta-analysis.J Prosthet Dent. 2016 Apr;115(4):419-27. doi: 10.1016/j.prosdent.2015.08.026. Epub 2015 Nov 14. J Prosthet Dent. 2016. PMID: 26589441
-
Peri-implant bone loss in cement- and screw-retained prostheses: systematic review and meta-analysis.J Clin Periodontol. 2013 Mar;40(3):287-95. doi: 10.1111/jcpe.12041. Epub 2013 Jan 9. J Clin Periodontol. 2013. PMID: 23297703
-
A Current Perspective on Screw-Retained Single-Implant Restorations: A Review of Pertinent Literature.J Esthet Restor Dent. 2017 May 6;29(3):161-171. doi: 10.1111/jerd.12283. Epub 2017 Jan 23. J Esthet Restor Dent. 2017. PMID: 28112854 Review.
-
Peri-implant and esthetic outcomes of cemented and screw-retained crowns using zirconia abutments in single implant-supported restorations-A systematic review and meta-analysis.Clin Oral Implants Res. 2021 Oct;32(10):1143-1158. doi: 10.1111/clr.13824. Epub 2021 Aug 17. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2021. PMID: 34352144
-
Effects of modifying implant screw access channels on the amount of extruded excess cement and retention of cement-retained implant-supported dental prostheses: A systematic review.J Prosthet Dent. 2019 Jan;121(1):52-58. doi: 10.1016/j.prosdent.2018.03.002. Epub 2018 Jul 10. J Prosthet Dent. 2019. PMID: 30006223
Publication types
MeSH terms
Substances
LinkOut - more resources
Miscellaneous