Shadid Rola, Sadaqa Nasrin
Department of Prosthodontics, Arab American University, Jenin, Palestinian Territory.
J Oral Implantol. 2012 Jun;38(3):298-307. doi: 10.1563/AAID-JOI-D-10-00146. Epub 2010 Nov 23.
Implant-supported restorations can be secured to implants with screws (screw-retained), or they can be cemented to abutments which are attached to implants with screws (cement-retained). This literature review discusses the advantages and disadvantages of each method of retention from different aspects. These aspects include: ease of fabrication and cost, esthetics, access, occlusion, retention, incidence of loss of retention, retrievability, clinical prosthesis fit, restriction of implant position, effect on peri-implant tissue health, provisionalization, immediate loading, impression procedures, porcelain fracture, and clinical performance. Peer-reviewed literature published in the English language between 1955 and 2010 was reviewed using PubMed and hand searches. Since the choice of using either method of retention is still controversial, this review article offers some clinical situations that prefer one method of retention over the other. The review demonstrated that each method of retention has certain advantages and disadvantages; however, there are some clinical situations in which it is better to select one method of retention rather than the other.
种植体支持的修复体可以用螺丝固定在种植体上(螺丝固位),也可以粘结在通过螺丝连接到种植体的基台上(粘结固位)。这篇文献综述从不同方面讨论了每种固位方法的优缺点。这些方面包括:制作的难易程度和成本、美观性、可达性、咬合、固位力、固位丧失的发生率、可取出性、临床修复体的贴合度、种植体位置的限制、对种植体周围组织健康的影响、临时修复、即刻加载、印模程序、瓷裂以及临床性能。使用PubMed和手工检索的方式对1955年至2010年间发表的英文同行评审文献进行了综述。由于使用哪种固位方法的选择仍存在争议,这篇综述文章提供了一些更倾向于一种固位方法而非另一种的临床情况。综述表明,每种固位方法都有一定的优缺点;然而,在某些临床情况下,选择一种固位方法比另一种更好。