PASSIVITY OF SCREW-RETAINED IMPLANT-SUPPORTED PEEK FRAMEWORKS USING SEGMENTED VERIFICATION JIGS VERSUS CONVENTIONAL JIGS-FREE TECHNIQUES UTILIZING OPEN-TRAY IMPRESSION PROCEDURES: 2 years clinical & radiographic outcomes | ||||
| Egyptian Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery | ||||
| Articles in Press, Accepted Manuscript, Available Online from 31 January 2023 | ||||
| Document Type: Original Article | ||||
| DOI: 10.21608/omx.2022.167769.1171 | ||||
 View on SCiNiTO | ||||
| Authors | ||||
MOSTAFA HELMY MOSTAFA AHMED   ; ENAS TAHA IBRAHIM DARWISH
| ||||
| PROSTHODONTIC DEPARTMENT-FACULTY OF DENTISTRY-CAIRO UNIVERSITY | ||||
| Abstract | ||||
| Purpose: This comparative study aimed to assess if there was a difference in clinical & radiographic outcomes of a maxillary screw-retained implant-supported prosthesis constructed from PEEK regarding the effect of utilizing the segmented verification jig technique. Material and methods: In this clinical investigation, fourteen patients with edentulous maxillary ridges carefully chosen having adequate amounts and qualities of bone. There were two groups of patients; Group I (seven patients) received an Implant-supported screw-retained full arch maxillary prosthesis with a delayed functional loading protocol utilizing 6 implants, where, an open-tray impression technique was applied and the prosthesis PEEK without utilizing verification jig, while Group II (seven patients) received same prosthesis BUT with segmented verification jig technique. The radiographic outcomes measured at the time of prosthesis insertion, 6 months, one year& two years, respectively & clinical outcome represented as patients' satisfaction measured utilizing a customized chart of the questionnaire (VAS). Results: The several repetitions of the two groups were compared using the ANOVA test, which was also used to examine the changes over time within each group. Pair-wise comparisons made using Tukey's post-hoc test where the ANOVA test was significant. Clinical patients' satisfaction was measured using a visual analogue scale (VAS) and a separate t-test for a direct comparison of the two groups. Different intervals were significant for each group, with a p-value of 0.001. Conclusion: Achieving optimal passivity of the PEEK framework claimed through segmented verification jig manuver developed an advantageous response in terms of radiography outcomes as well as patient satisfaction. | ||||
| Keywords | ||||
| Dental implant; Verification jigs; Screw-retained Prosthesis; Delayed functional loading; PEEK frameworks | ||||
|
Statistics Article View: 58 |
||||
