Malmö University Publications
Operational message
There are currently operational disruptions. Troubleshooting is in progress.
Change search
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
Fixed Full-Arch Maxillary Prostheses Supported by Four Versus Six Implants: 5-Year Results of a Multicenter Randomized Clinical Trial
Malmö University, Faculty of Odontology (OD).ORCID iD: 0000-0002-2893-3676
Univ Pittsburgh, Sch Dent Med, Dept Periodont & Prevent Dent, Pittsburgh, PA USA.
Univ Pittsburgh, Sch Dent Med, Dept Periodont & Prevent Dent, Pittsburgh, PA USA; Univ Estadual Maringa, Dept Dent, Maringa, Parana, Brazil.
Inst Franci, Padua, Italy.
Show others and affiliations
2025 (English)In: Clinical Oral Implants Research, ISSN 0905-7161, E-ISSN 1600-0501, Vol. 36, no 3, p. 298-313Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

ObjectivesThis 5-year multicenter randomized clinical trial assessed the non-inferiority of maxillary implant-supported fixed complete dentures (FCDs) with four (4-I) compared to six implants (6-I) in terms of radiographic marginal bone level (MBL) changes after 5 years in function.Materials and MethodsIndividuals were randomly assigned to the 4-I or 6-I groups. Follow-ups occurred at 1, 3, and 5 years. At each visit, FCDs were unscrewed, clinical parameters (plaque index, bleeding on probing, pocket depth, and keratinized mucosa width) were recorded using a periodontal probe, periapical radiographs were obtained, and maintenance care was performed. MBL changes, incidence of techincal, prosthetic, and biological complications, treatments costs, and satisfaction were evaluated.ResultsOf 47 patients rehabiliated with 233 implants, survival rates were 99.3% for 6-I and 100% for 4-I (one early failure; 6-I group). No significant MBL differences were observed at 5 years between and within the groups. Both groups showed a decrease in keratinized mucosa width and experienced prosthetic and biological complications, but no peri-implantitis. The 4-I exhibited a significantly higher incidence of technical complications (16.6% vs. 0%) Cost analysis favored 4-I for initial and total costs. Clinician and patient satisfaction varied, with 4-I preferred aesthetically and 6-I functionally, particularly in speaking ability at earlier follow-ups.ConclusionThe use of FCDs supported by four implants is non-inferior to six implants in terms of radiographic MBL changes after 5 years in function. Both groups demonstrated comparable survival rates and incidence of biological and prosthetic complications. The 4-I was associated with higher technical complications and reduced overall treatment cost.Trial RegistrationClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT02405169

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
John Wiley & Sons, 2025. Vol. 36, no 3, p. 298-313
Keywords [en]
complications, edentulous maxilla, four implants, MBL change
National Category
Dentistry
Identifiers
URN: urn:nbn:se:mau:diva-72606DOI: 10.1111/clr.14383ISI: 001362669700001PubMedID: 39581887Scopus ID: 2-s2.0-86000426684OAI: oai:DiVA.org:mau-72606DiVA, id: diva2:1919640
Available from: 2024-12-09 Created: 2024-12-09 Last updated: 2025-05-21Bibliographically approved

Open Access in DiVA

No full text in DiVA

Other links

Publisher's full textPubMedScopus

Authority records

Toia, Marco

Search in DiVA

By author/editor
Toia, MarcoRavida, Andrea
By organisation
Faculty of Odontology (OD)
In the same journal
Clinical Oral Implants Research
Dentistry

Search outside of DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar

doi
pubmed
urn-nbn

Altmetric score

doi
pubmed
urn-nbn
Total: 30 hits
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf