Course Objectives (1 CE Credit)
The fixed full-arch implant prosthesis provides the edentulous patient with the highest possible level of prosthetic stability, chewing capability and quality of life. This type of restoration has traditionally been fabricated in the form of the screw-retained hybrid denture. Although highly effective, this type of prosthesis has proven vulnerable to fracture, premature wear and other maintenance issues. Due to advancements in dental CAD/CAM fabrication, full-arch implant prostheses can now be milled from monolithic zirconia, resulting in a more durable fixed restoration. In this multimedia presentation, Dr. Jeffrey Fleigel discusses three patient types that especially stand to benefit from the strength of the monolithic zirconia full-arch implant prosthesis. Topics include:
- The benefits of fixed full-arch implant restorations
- Acrylic hybrid dentures vs. monolithic zirconia full-arch implant prostheses
- Circumstances indicating that a more durable restoration is needed
- The use of provisional appliances to fine-tune prosthetic design
- Restorative protocol for the monolithic zirconia full-arch implant prosthesis
- Evaluation of wear facets to identify parafunctional habits
- Presenting treatment options to the fully edentulous patient
- Factors that contribute to prosthetic wear and breakage
- Achieving proper fit and function in full-arch implant cases
In addition to providing patients with the superior function, comfort and stability of a fixed restoration, the monolithic zirconia full-arch implant prosthesis has the strength needed to withstand functional forces over time. Further, the restorative protocol utilized to provide this type of restoration can help clinicians overcome difficulties related to prosthetic design and parafunctional habits. The advantages of this treatment option are illustrated by reviewing three indications for which the monolithic zirconia implant prosthesis is particularly well-suited.
- Carlsson GE, Lindquist LW. Ten-year longitudinal study of masticatory function in edentulous patients treated with fixed complete dentures on osseointegrated implants. Int J Prosthodont. 1994 Sep-Oct;7(5):448-53.
- Müller F, Hernandez M, Grütter L, Aracil-Kessler L, Weingart D, Schimmel M. Masseter muscle thickness, chewing efficiency and bite force in edentulous patients with fixed and removable implant-supported prostheses: a cross-sectional multicenter study. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2012 Feb;23(2):144-50.
- Oh SH, Kim Y, Park JY, Jung YJ, Kim SK, Park SY. Comparison of fixed implant-supported prostheses, removable implant-supported prostheses, and complete dentures: patient satisfaction and oral health-related quality of life. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2016 Feb;27(2):e31-7.
- Brennan M, Houston F, O’Sullivan M, O’Connell B. Patient satisfaction and oral health-related quality of life outcomes of implant overdentures and fixed complete dentures. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2010 Jul-Aug;25(4):791-800.
- Clinicians Report. Jun 2014;7(6).
- Carames J, Tovar Suinaga L, Yu YC, Pérez A, Kang M. Clinical advantages and limitations of monolithic zirconia restorations full arch implant supported reconstruction: case series. Int J Dent. 2015;2015:392496.
- Pozzi A, Holst S, Fabbri G, Tallarico M. Clinical reliability of CAD/CAM cross-arch zirconia bridges on immediately loaded implants placed with computer-assisted/template-guided surgery: a retrospective study with a follow-up between 3 and 5 years. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res. 2015 Jan;17 Suppl 1:e86-96.