The effect of BioHPP versus Zirconia CAD/CAM-fabricated fixed-detachable prosthesis rehabilitating single maxillary arches on the peri-implant bone level changes | ||||
| Egyptian Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery | ||||
| Volume 13, Issue 1, January 2022, Page 35-45 PDF (593.86 K) | ||||
| Document Type: Original Article | ||||
| DOI: 10.21608/omx.2022.134671.1160 | ||||
 View on SCiNiTO | ||||
| Authors | ||||
Mona Aboelnagga   ; Omar El Sadat
| ||||
| Prosthodontic Department, Faculty of Dentistry, Ain Shams university, Cairo, Egypt | ||||
| Abstract | ||||
| Purpose: The objective of this study was to compare the use of BioHPP and zirconia CAD/CAM fabricated materials in implant supported maxillary fixed-detachable prosthesis opposing dentate mandibular arch, where peri-implants bone level changes were evaluated for two years. Materials and method: Ten patients with edentulous single maxilla opposing dentate mandibular arch were selected to share in this study. For all patients, proper planning for implant placement was made where the participants were randomly allocated into two groups five patients in each group. Six implants were inserted guided by the sterolithographic surgical guide following flapless surgical approach. Immediate loading protocol was followed, where the milled acrylic temporary prosthesis, which was planned for each patient according to the computer software, was screwed to the implants. After 4 months, the final restoration was placed according to the following grouping. In group I, patients were rehabilitated with fixed-detachable zirconium restoration while in group II patients were rehabilitated with fixed-detachable BioHpp Peek restoration. Peri-implant marginal bone changes were evaluated at loading time, after 6 month, 1 and 2 years follow up visits. Data collected were tabulated and statistically analyzed. Results: In intragroup comparisons, peri implant bone loss was significant. Where in group I, the mean value of peri–implant bone height change measures from implants insertion to 6 month was 0.35 mm, from insertion to 12 months was 0.62 mm while from insertion to 24 months follow up was found to be 0.96 mm. While in group II at same time intervals were 0.39 mm, 0.69 mm and 1.23 mm respectively. On the other hand in intergroup comparison, to compare the mean amount of peri-implant bone height changes in the two studied groups during the follow up intervals, student t test was performed and showed that group II had a non significant higher bone loss. Conclusion: Based on these results and within the limitation of this study. Both Zirconia and BioHpp when used as framework material for fixed-detachable maxillary single prosthesis had successful results on the supporting implants. However, BioHpp fixed-detachable prosthesis had higher effect on the peri-implant marginal bone loss but it was not of statistical significance. | ||||
| Keywords | ||||
| Dental implant; CAD/CAM; BioHpp; PEEK; Zirconia; fixed- detachable; single Maxillary arch | ||||
|
Statistics Article View: 102 PDF Download: 611 |
||||
