Download PDF
CC BY-NC-ND 4.0 · Eur J Dent 2021; 15(02): 290-294
DOI: 10.1055/s-0040-1716632
Original Article

1-Year Evaluation of OT Bridge Abutments for Immediately Loaded Maxillary Fixed Restorations: A Multicenter Study

Rosario Acampora
1   Private Practice, Italy
,
Marco Montanari
1   Private Practice, Italy
,
Roberto Scrascia
1   Private Practice, Italy
,
Emiliano Ferrari
1   Private Practice, Italy
,
Massimo Pasi
2   Department of Dental, CLMOPD Ateneo Vita-Salute San Raffaele, Milan, Italy
,
Gabriele Cervino
3   Department of Biomedical and Dental Sciences, Morphological and Functional Images, School of Dentistry, University of Messina, Policlinico G. Martino, Via Consolare Valeria, Messina, Italy
,
Silvio Mario Meloni
4   Department of Medical, Surgical and Experimental Sciences, University of Sassari, Sassari, Italy
,
Aurea Immacolata Lumbau
4   Department of Medical, Surgical and Experimental Sciences, University of Sassari, Sassari, Italy
,
Erta Xhanari
5   Departament of Implantology and Prosthetic Aspects, Master of Science in Dentistry Program, Aldent University, Tirana, Albania
,
Alba Koshovari
5   Departament of Implantology and Prosthetic Aspects, Master of Science in Dentistry Program, Aldent University, Tirana, Albania
,
Marco Tallarico
6   School of Dentistry, University of Sassari, Sassari, Italy
› Author Affiliations
› Further Information
   Permissions and Reprints

Abstract

Objective  Preliminary data on survival and success rates of immediately loaded, maxillary, screw-retained, implant-supported, fixed restorations delivered on narrow and low-profile OT Equator abutments (OT Bridge, Rhein’83) were evaluated.

Materials and Methods This retrospective study evaluated data collected from patients rehabilitated with OT Bridge prosthetic concept between November 2017 and February 2019 in six different centers. Outcome measures were implant and prosthetic survival rates, biological and technical complications, marginal bone loss (MBL), oral health impact profile (OHIP), bleeding on probing, and plaque index.

Results A total of 76 implants were inserted in 14 patients. Patients were followed for a mean period of 15.8 months (range = 12–24). All the patients receive OT Equator (Rhein'83) as intermediate abutments. One year after loading, one implant failed (1.3%). None of the prosthesis failed. One prosthetic complication was experienced in one patient. Three out of 76 implants were connected to the prosthetic framework using only the Seeger system, without screw. Difference in OHIP values was statistically significant (71.9 ± 8.5; p = 0.000). One year after loading, MBL was 0.21 ± 0.11 mm and p-value was 0.000. One year after loading, 8.7% of the examined implant sites present positive bleeding on probing, while 6.4% of the implant sites presented plaque.

Conclusion The OT Equator abutments (Rhein'83) showed successful results when used to support maxillary fixed dental prosthesis delivered on four to six implants. High implant and prosthetic survival rates, very low complications, high patient satisfaction, and good biological parameters, including only 0.2 mm of bone remodeling were experienced one year after function. Further studies are needed to confirm these preliminary results.

Keywords

OT Bridge - dental implants - immediate loading - complete edentulous patients - maxilla


Publication History

Article published online:
23 February 2021

© 2021. European Journal of Dentistry. This is an open access article published by Thieme under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonDerivative-NonCommercial-License, permitting copying and reproduction so long as the original work is given appropriate credit. Contents may not be used for commercial purposes, or adapted, remixed, transformed or built upon. (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/)

Thieme Medical and Scientific Publishers Private Ltd.
A-12, 2nd Floor, Sector 2, Noida-201301 UP, India

 

  • References

  • 1 Tallarico M, Meloni SM, Canullo L, Caneva M, Polizzi G. Five-year results of a randomized controlled trial comparing patients rehabilitated with immediately loaded maxillary cross-arch fixed dental prosthesis supported by four or six implants placed using guided surgery. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res 2016; 18 (05) 965-972
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 2 Meloni SM, Tallarico M, Pisano M, Xhanari E, Canullo L. Immediate loading of fixed complete denture prosthesis supported by 4-8 implants placed using guided surgery: a 5-year prospective study on 66 patients with 356 implants. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res 2016; 37 (05) 610-621
    Google Scholar
  • 3 Tallarico M, Canullo L, Xhanari E, Meloni SM. Dental implants treatment outcomes in patient under active therapy with alendronate: 3-year follow-up results of a multicenter prospective observational study. Clin Oral Implants Res 2016; 27 (08) 943-949
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 4 Canullo L, Tallarico M, Gracis S, Vela X, Rodríguez X, Covani U. Clinical considerations on strategies that avoid multiple connections and disconnections of implant abutments. Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent 2020; 40 (01) 9-17
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 5 Tallarico M, Caneva M, Meloni SM, Xhanari E, Covani U, Canullo L. Definitive abutments placed at implant insertion and never removed: is it an effective approach? A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 2018; 76 (02) 316-324
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 6 Tallarico M, Caneva M, Baldini N. et al. Patient-centered rehabilitation of single, partial, and complete edentulism with cemented- or screw-retained fixed dental prosthesis: the first Osstem advanced dental implant research and education center consensus conference 2017. Eur J Dent 2018; 12 (04) 617-626
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 7 Meloni SM, Spano G, Ceruso FM. et al. Upper jaw implant restoration on six implants with flapless guided template surgery and immediate loading: 5 years results of a prospective case series. ORAL Implantology. 2020; 12 (02) 151-160
    Google Scholar
  • 8 Tallarico M, Esposito M, Xhanari E, Caneva M, Meloni SM. Computer-guided vs freehand placement of immediately loaded dental implants: 5-year postloading results of a randomised controlled trial.. Eur J Oral Implantol 2018; 11 (02) 203-213
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 9 Tallarico M, Meloni SM. Retrospective analysis on survival rate, template-related complications, and prevalence of peri-implantitis of 694 anodized implants placed using computer-guided surgery: results between 1 and 10 years of follow-up. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2017; 32 (05) 1162-1171
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 10 Tallarico M, Canullo L, Caneva M, Özcan M. Microbial colonization at the implant-abutment interface and its possible influence on periimplantitis: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Prosthodont Res 2017; 61 (03) 233-241
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 11 Tallarico M, Ortensi L, Martinolli M. et al Multicenter Retrospective Analysis of Implant Overdentures Delivered with Different Design and Attachment Systems: Results Between One and 17 Years of Follow-Up.. Dent J (Basel) 2018; 6 (04) 71
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 12 Scrascia R, Martinolli M, Venezia P, Casucci A, Ortensi L, Tallarico M. Feasibility of low profile attachments to improve quality of life on patients with implant-retained mandibular overdenture: 1-year preliminary results of a multicenter prospective case series study. J Oral Health Dental Manag 2018;17:No. 5
  • 13 Tallarico M, Schiappa D, Schipani F, Cocchi F, Annucci M, Xhanari E. Improved fully digital workflow to rehabilitate edentulous patient with an implant overdenture in 4 appointments: A case report.. J Oral Sci Rehabil 2017; 3 (03) 38-46
    Google Scholar
  • 14 Xhanari E, Scrascia R, Kadiu B, Tallarico M. Two implants supporting a mandibular overdenture to rehabilitate Cawood and Howell Class V and VI patients: a proof-of-concept study.. J Oral Sci Rehabil 2017; 3 (02) 52-59
    Google Scholar
  • 15 Tallarico M, Xhanari E, Kadiu B, Scrascia R. Implant rehabilitation of extremely atrophic mandibles (Cawood and Howell Class VI) with a fixed-removable solution supported by four implants: one-year results from a preliminary prospective case series study.. J Oral Sci Rehabil 2017; 3 (02) 32-40
    Google Scholar
  • 16 Bramanti E, Cervino G, Lauritano F. et al FEM and Von Mises Analysis on Prosthetic Crowns Structural Elements: Evaluation of Different Applied Materials.. Scientific World Journal 2017; 2017: 1029574 DOI: 10.1155/2017/1029574.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 17 Cervino G, Fiorillo L, Arzukanyan AV, Spagnuolo G, Campagna P, Cicciù M. Application of bioengineering devices for stress evaluation in dentistry: the last 10 years FEM parametric analysis of outcomes and current trends. Minerva Stomatol 2020; 69 (01) 55-62
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 18 Cicciù M, Bramanti E, Cecchetti F, Scappaticci L, Guglielmino E, Risitano G. FEM and Von Mises analyses of different dental implant shapes for masticatory loading distribution. Oral Implantol (Rome) 2014; 7 (01) 1-10
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 19 Cicciù M, Cervino G, Milone D, Risitano G. FEM Analysis of Dental Implant-Abutment Interface Overdenture Components and Parametric Evaluation of Equator® and Locator® Prosthodontics Attachments. . Materials (Basel) 2019; 12 (04) 592 Published 2019 Feb 16 DOI: 10.3390/ma12040592.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 20 Cicciù M, Cervino G, Bramanti E. et al. FEM analysis of mandibular prosthetic overdenture supported by dental implants: evaluation of different retention methods. Comput Math Methods Med 2015; 2015: 943839
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 21 Tallarico M, Scrascia R, Annucci M. et al. Errors in implant positioning due to lack of planning: a clinical case report of new prosthetic materials and solutions. Materials (Basel) 2020; 13 (08) 1883
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 22 Soto-Penaloza D, Zaragozí-Alonso R, Penarrocha-Diago M, Penarrocha-Diago M. The all-on-four treatment concept: systematic review. J Clin Exp Dent 2017; 9 (03) e474-e488
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 23 Scrascia R, Fiorillo L, Gaita V, Secondo L, Nicita F, Cervino G. Implant-supported prosthesis for edentulous patient rehabilitation. from temporary prosthesis to definitive with a new protocol: a single case report. Prosthesis 2020; 2 (01) 10-24
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 24 Cervino G, Montanari M, Santonocito D. et al. Comparison of two low-profile prosthetic retention system interfaces: preliminary data of an in vitro study. Prosthesis. 2019; 1 (01) 54-60
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 25 Cicciù M, Cervino G, Terranova A. et al. Prosthetic and mechanical parameters of the facial bone under the load of different dental implant shapes: a parametric study.. Prosthesis 2019; 1 (01) 41-53
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 26 Ortensi L, Vitali T, Bonfiglioli R, Grande F. New Tricks in the preparation design for prosthetic ceramic laminate veeners. Prosthesis 2019; 1 (01) 29-40
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 27 Fiorillo L, D’Amico C, Turkina AY, Nicita F, Amoroso G, Risitano G. Endo and exoskeleton: new technologies on composite materials.. Prosthesis 2020; 2 (01) 1-9
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar