Digital versus Traditional Workflow for Posterior Maxillary Rehabilitations Supported by One Straight and One Tilted Implant: A 3-Year Prospective Comparative Study

Abstract EN

Objectives.

The aim of the study was to evaluate and compare digital and traditional prosthetic workflow for posterior maxillary restorations supported by an upright and a distally tilted implant at 3-year follow-up.

Materials and Methods.

Twenty-four patients were treated in the posterior maxilla with 24 immediately loaded axial and 24 distally tilted implants supporting 3-unit or 4-unit screw-retained prostheses.

Three months after initial loading patients were randomly stratified into two groups: definitive traditional impressions were carried out in the control group, while digital impressions were performed in the test group.

The framework-implant connection accuracy was evaluated by means intraoral digital radiographs at 3, 6, 12, and 36 months of follow-up examinations.

Outcome considerations comprised implant and prosthetic survival and success rates, marginal bone level changes, and required clinical time to take impressions.

Results.

A total of 24 patients received immediately loaded screw-retained prostheses supported by an upright and a distally tilted implant (total 48 implants).

No implant dropouts occurred, showing an overall survival rate of 100% for both groups.

None of the 24 fixed prostheses were lost during the observation period (prosthetic survival rate of 100%).

No statistically significant differences in marginal bone loss were found between control and test groups.

The digital impression procedure required on average less clinical time than the conventional procedure.

Conclusions.

Clinical and radiologic results suggest that digital impression is a predictable procedure for posterior maxillary restorations supported by an upright and a distally tilted implant.