The Journal of Contemporary Dental Practice

Register      Login



Volume / Issue

Online First

Related articles

VOLUME 23 , ISSUE 1 ( January, 2022 ) > List of Articles


Clinical Success of Screw-retained Dental Implants: A Systematic Review

Jayant Prakash, Kumar Ranvijay, Mahesh Shenoy, Zeeshan Qamar, Ahmed Mabkhot Ahmed Balabed, Khalid Mohammed Alkadi

Keywords : Fixed partial dentures, Implant-supported dentures, Marginal bone loss, Screw-retained implants

Citation Information : Prakash J, Ranvijay K, Shenoy M, Qamar Z, Balabed AM, Alkadi KM. Clinical Success of Screw-retained Dental Implants: A Systematic Review. J Contemp Dent Pract 2022; 23 (1):118-122.

DOI: 10.5005/jp-journals-10024-3231

License: CC BY-NC 4.0

Published Online: 21-05-2022

Copyright Statement:  Copyright © 2022; The Author(s).


Objective: The objective of the research was to review the literature on clinical evaluation and success of screw-retained dental implants by assessing the marginal bone loss (MBL). Methods: Online electronic databases such as PubMed/MEDLINE, Google Scholar, and Cochrane Library were searched using appropriate keywords for the last 20 years, dated from January 1, 2000, till August 1, 2021, with a restriction on language. Additional sources like major journals, unpublished studies, conference proceedings, and cross-references were explored. Information curated for data extraction included methodology, population, type of implants used, and duration of follow-up. Results: The PubMed/MEDLINE, Google Scholar, Cochrane Library, and additional sources identified a huge number, out of which 637 search results were screened, out of which 322 were duplicates. The remaining 315 unique studies were screened for the titles and abstracts, and 23 articles were selected for full-text screening. A total of six articles that matched the eligibility criteria were processed for qualitative analysis. Conclusion: Despite the uncertain retrievability of screw-retained implant-supported fixed restorations, this treatment option in fixed implant prosthodontics is a reliable and effective choice, especially for implant-supported long-span fixed partial dentures (FPDs), full-arch FPDs, and cantilever FPDs.

  1. Brägger U, Karoussis I, Persson R, et al. Technical and biological complications/failures with single crowns and fixed partial dentures on implants: a 10-year prospective cohort study. Clin Oral Implants Res 2005;16(3):326–334. DOI: 10.1111/j.1600-0501.2005.01105.x.
  2. Pennington J, Parker S. Improving quality of life using removable and fixed implant prostheses. Compend Contin Educ Dent 2012;33(4): 268–270, 272, 274–276. PMID: 22536660.
  3. Michalakis KX, Hirayama H, Garefis PD. Cement-retained versus screw-retained implant restorations: a critical review. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2003;18(5):719–728. PMID: 14579961.
  4. da Rocha PV, Freitas MA, de Morais Alves da Cunha T. Influence of screw access on the retention of cement-retained implant prostheses. J Prosthet Dent 2013;109(4):264–268. DOI: 10.1016/S0022-3913(13)60055-4.
  5. Taylor TD, Agar JR, Vogiatzi T. Implant prosthodontics: current perspective and future directions. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2000;15(1):66–75. PMID: 10697941.
  6. Shadid R, Sadaqa N. A comparison between screw- and cement-retained implant prostheses. A literature review. J Oral Implantol 2012;38(3):298–307. DOI: 10.1563/AAID-JOI-D-10-00146.
  7. Tosches NA, Brägger U, Lang NP. Marginal fit of cemented and screw-retained crowns incorporated on the Straumann (ITI) Dental Implant System: an in vitro study. Clin Oral Implants Res 2009;20(1):79–86. DOI: 10.1111/j.1600-0501.2008.01591.x.
  8. Aglietta M, Siciliano VI, Zwahlen M, et al. A systematic review of the survival and complication rates of implant supported fixed dental prostheses with cantilever extensions after an observation period of at least 5 years. Clin Oral Implants Res 2009;20(5):441–451. DOI: 10.1111/j.1600-0501.2009.01706.x.
  9. Lang NP, Pjetursson BE, Tan K, et al. A systematic review of the survival and complication rates of fixed partial dentures (FPDs) after an observation period of at least 5 years. II. Combined tooth–implant-supported FPDs. Clin Oral Implants Res 2004;15(6):643–653. DOI: 10.1111/j.1600-0501.2004.01118.x.
  10. Pjetursson BE, Brägger U, Lang NP, et al. Comparison of survival and complication rates of tooth-supported fixed dental prostheses (FDPs) and implant-supported FDPs and single crowns (SCs). Clin Oral Implants Res 2007;18 (Suppl 3):97–113. DOI: 10.1111/j.1600-0501.2007.01439.x.
  11. Pjetursson BE, Tan K, Lang NP, et al. A systematic review of the survival and complication rates of fixed partial dentures (FPDs) after an observation period of at least 5 years. Clin Oral Implants Res 2004;15(6):625–642. DOI: 10.1111/j.1600-0501.2004.01117.x.
  12. Farina AP, Spazzin AO, Pantoja JM, et al. An in vitro comparison of joint stability of implant-supported fixed prosthetic suprastructures retained with different prosthetic screws and levels of fit under masticatory simulation conditions. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2012;27(4):833–838. PMID: 22848885.
  13. Tan K, Pjetursson BE, Lang NP, et al. A systematic review of the survival and complication rates of fixed partial dentures (FPDs) after an observation period of at least 5 years. Clin Oral Implants Res 2004;15(6):654–666. DOI: 10.1111/j.1600-0501.2004.01119.x.
  14. Jung RE, Pjetursson BE, Glauser R, et al. A systematic review of the 5-year survival and complication rates of implant-supported single crowns. Clin Oral Implants Res 2008;19(2):119–130. DOI: 10.1111/j.1600-0501.2007.01453.x.
  15. Pjetursson BE, Lang NP. Prosthetic treatment planning on the basis of scientific evidence. J Oral Rehabil 2008;35 (Suppl 1):72–79. DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2842.2007.01824.x.
  16. Vigolo P, Mutinelli S, Givani A, et al. Cemented versus screw-retained implant-supported single-tooth crowns: a 10-year randomised controlled trial. Eur J Oral Implantol 2012;5(4):355–364. PMID: 23304689.
  17. Sterne JA, Hernán MA, Reeves BC, et al. ROBINS-I: a tool for assessing risk of bias in non-randomised studies of interventions. BMJ 2016;355:i4919. DOI: 10.1136/bmj.i4919.
  18. Åstrand P, Anzén B, Karlsson U, et al. Nonsubmerged implants in the treatment of the edentulous upper jaw: a prospective clinical and radiographic study of ITI implants—results after 1 year. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res 2000;2(3):166–174. DOI: 10.1111/j.1708-8208.2000.tb00008.x.
  19. Arvidson K, Esselin O, Felle-Persson E, et al. Early loading of mandibular full-arch bridges screw retained after 1 week to four to five Monotype® implants: 3-year results from a prospective multicentre study. Clin Oral Implants Res 2008;19(7):693–703. DOI: 10.1111/j.1600-0501.2008.01540.x.
  20. Bornstein MM, Wittneben JG, Brägger U, et al. Early loading at 21 days of non-submerged titanium implants with a chemically modified sandblasted and acid-etched surface: 3-year results of a prospective study in the posterior mandible. J Periodontol 2010;81(6):809–818. DOI: 10.1902/jop.2010.090727.
  21. Heschl A, Payer M, Platzer S, et al. Immediate rehabilitation of the edentulous mandible with screw type implants: results after up to 10 years of clinical function. Clin Oral Implants Res 2012;23(10): 1217–1223. DOI: 10.1111/j.1600-0501.2011.02292.x.
  22. Sahrmann P, Naenni N, Jung RE, et al. Success of 6-mm implants with single-tooth restorations: a 3-year randomized controlled clinical trial. J Dent Res 2016;95(6):623–628. DOI: 10.1177/0022034516633432.
  23. Casar-Espinosa JC, Castillo-Oyagüe R, Serrera-Figallo MÁ, et al. Combination of straight and tilted implants for supporting screw-retained dental prostheses in atrophic posterior maxillae: a 2-year prospective study. J Dent 2017;63:85–93. DOI: 10.1016/j.jdent.2017.05.022.
  24. Aalam AA, Reshad M, Chee WW, et al. Surgical template stabilization with transitional implants in the treatment of the edentulous mandible: a technical note. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2005;20(3):462–465. PMID: 15973960.
  25. Shotwell JL, Billy EJ, Wang HL, et al. Implant surgical guide fabrication for partially edentulous patients. J Prosthet Dent 2005;93(3):294–297. DOI: 10.1016/j.prosdent.2004.12.013.
  26. Meitner SW, Tallents RH. Surgical templates for prosthetically guided implant placement. J Prosthet Dent 2004;92(6):569–574. DOI: 10.1016/j.prosdent.2004.08.020.
  27. Berglundh T, Persson L, Klinge B. A systematic review of the incidence of biological and technical complications in implant dentistry reported in prospective longitudinal studies of at least 5 years. J Clin Periodontol 2002;29 (Suppl 3):197–212. DOI: 10.1034/j.1600-051x.29.s3.12.x.
  28. Hälg GA, Schmid J, Hämmerle CH. Bone level changes at implants supporting crowns or fixed partial dentures with or without cantilevers. Clin Oral Implants Res 2008;19(10):983–990. DOI: 10.1111/j.1600-0501.2008.01556.x.
  29. Zitzmann NU, Berglundh T. Definition and prevalence of peri-implant diseases. J Clin Periodontol 2008;35(Suppl 8):286–291. DOI: 10.1111/j.1600-051X.2008.01274.x.
  30. Mangano C, Mangano F, Piattelli A, et al. Prospective clinical evaluation of 307 single-tooth morse taper-connection implants: a multicenter study. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2010;25(2):394–400. PMID: 20369101.
  31. Sailer I, Zembic A, Jung RE, et al. Randomized controlled clinical trial of customized zirconia and titanium implant abutments for canine and posterior single-tooth implant reconstructions: preliminary results at 1 year of function. Clin Oral Implants Res 2009;20(3):219–225. DOI: 10.1111/j.1600-0501.2008.01636.x.
  32. Drago CJ. A clinical study of the efficacy of gold-tite square abutment screws in cement-retained implant restorations. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2003;18(2):273–278. PMID: 12705307.
  33. Duncan JP, Nazarova E, Vogiatzi T, et al. Prosthodontic complications in a prospective clinical trial of single-stage implants at 36 months. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2003;18(4):561–565. PMID: 12939009.
  34. Jebreen SE, Khraisat A. Multicenter retrospective study of ITI implant-supported posterior partial prosthesis in Jordan. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res 2007;9(2):89–93. DOI: 10.1111/j.1708-8208.2007.00053.x.
  35. Khraisat A, Jebreen SE, Baqain ZH, et al. Multicenter retrospective study of cementretained implant-supported anterior partial prostheses: success and restoration evaluation. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2008;23(4):705–708. PMID: 18807568.
  36. Vigolo P, Givani A, Majzoub Z, et al. Cemented versus screw-retained implant-supported single-tooth crowns: a 4-year prospective clinical study. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2004;19(2):260–265. PMID: 15101598.
  37. Vigolo P, Givani A, Majzoub Z, et al. A 4-year prospective study to assess peri-implant hard and soft tissues adjacent to titanium versus gold-alloy abutments in cemented single implant crowns. J Prosthodont 2006;15(4):250–256. DOI: 10.1111/j.1532-849X.2006.00114.x.
  38. Nedir R, Bischof M, Szmukler-Moncler S, et al. Prosthetic complications with dental implants: from an upto-8-year experience in private practice. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2006;21(6):919–928. PMID: 17190302.
  39. Romeo E, Tomasi C, Finini I, et al. Implant-supported fixed cantilever prosthesis in partially edentulous jaws: a cohort prospective study. Clin Oral Implants Res 2009;20(11):1278–1285. DOI: 10.1111/j.1600-0501.2009.01766.x.
  40. Gervais MJ, Wilson PR. A rationale for retrievability of fixed, implant-supported prostheses: a complication-based analysis. Int J Prosthodont 2007;20(1):13–24. PMID: 17319357.
PDF Share
PDF Share

© Jaypee Brothers Medical Publishers (P) LTD.