Purpose: To evaluate the implant survival and the prevalence of biologic and mechanical complications in edentulous patients restored with complete-arch implant-supported fixed dental prostheses (IFDPs).
Keywords: dental implants, fixed prosthesis, full edentulism, implant survival, mechanical complications
Materials and Methods: Patients restored with complete-arch screw-retained IFDPs between January 2012 and December 2019 with a minimum 2-year follow-up were included. Outcome measures were cumulative survival rate (CSR) for implants and prostheses, biologic complications, and mechanical complications. A generalized estimating equation model was used to estimate potential risk factors for mechanical complications. Patient satisfaction was investigated using a standardized questionnaire.
Results: A total of 44 prostheses supported by 268 implants in 30 patients were included for a mean duration of 4.8 years (range: 2 to 9 years). Eighteen of the prostheses were zirconia-ceramic (group ZC), and 26 were titanium-ceramic (group TC). The CSR for the implants and IFDPs was 99.3% (95% CI: 98.2% to 100.3%) and 92.5% (95% CI: 84.2% to 100.8%), respectively. The most common biologic complication was peri-implant mucositis (4.5%), followed by peri-implantitis (3.0%). The most common mechanical complication was ceramic chipping (45.5%), followed by crown debonding (13.6%) and framework fracture (4.5%). There was no significant difference in the prevalence of complications between groups TC and ZC (P > .050). The presence of cantilever (OR = 5.54, P = .048) and maxillary arch (OR = 5.94, P = .041) were significantly associated with mechanical complications. Patient satisfaction scores were generally high, but some continued to be bothered by speech problems (13.6%).
Conclusion: Complete-arch IFDPs presented reliable clinical outcomes for edentulous patients with a high implant survival rate and a high level of patient satisfaction. However, a high incidence of mechanical complications occurred in the long term. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2023;38:84–93. doi: 10.11607/jomi.9808