Carbon fibre versus metal framework in full‐arch immediate loading rehabilitations of the maxilla – a cohort clinical study

Abstract

Frameworks made of carbon fibre-reinforced composites (CFRC) seem to be a viable alternative to traditional metal frameworks in implant prosthodontics. CFRC provide stiffness, rigidity and optimal biocompatibility. The aim of the present prospective study was to compare carbon fibre frameworks versus metal frameworks used to rigidly splint implants in full-arch immediate loading rehabilitations. Forty-two patients (test group) were rehabilitated with full-arch immediate loading rehabilitations of the upper jaw (total: 170 implants) following the Columbus Bridge Protocol with four to six implants with distal tilted implants. All patients were treated with resin screw-retained full-arch prostheses endowed with carbon fibre frameworks. The mean follow-up was 22 months (range: 18-24). Differences in the absolute change of bone resorption over time between the two implant sides (mesial and distal) were assessed performing a Mann-Whitney U-test. The outcomes were statistically compared with those of patients rehabilitated following the same protocol but using metal frameworks (control group: 34 patients with 163 implants - data reported in Tealdo, Menini, Bevilacqua, Pera, Pesce, Signori, Pera, Int J Prosthodont, 27, 2014, 207). Ten implants failed in the control group (6·1%); none failed in the test group (P = 0·002). A statistically significant difference in the absolute change of bone resorption around the implants was found between the two groups (P = 0·004), with greater mean peri-implant bone resorption in the control group (1 mm) compared to the test group (0·8 mm). Carbon fibre frameworks may be considered as a viable alternative to the metal ones and showed less marginal bone loss around implants and a greater implant survival rate during the observation period.

Does the prosthesis weight matter? 3D finite element analysis of a fixed implant-supported prosthesis at different weights and implant numbers

“…43 There are reports on the success of full arch prostheses with infrastructure in zirconia of more than 3 years. 4 Its use is justified by the high resistance of this material, eliminating the application of a layer of opaque material in the infrastructure due to the white color of the material and wear resistance. 43 It was one of the most heavily simulated prostheses in the present study, and generated the second most microstrain around the implants.…”

“…Several studies evaluating prosthetic materials report that a light restorative material is advantageous. [1][2][3] A previous study 4 asserted that reinforced composite frameworks seem to be a viable alternative to traditional metal frameworks in implant prosthodontics. The authors also described the lighter framework as an advantage for the treatment.…”

Mechanical characterisation of multi vs. uni-directional carbon fiber frameworks for dental implant applications

“…Carbon Fiber Reinforced Polymer composites (CFRP) frameworks have recently been introduced in implant dentistry as a viable alternative to the classical metal frameworks [1]. CFRP present optimal biocompatibility and mechanical characteristics useful in the fabrication of prosthodontic frameworks [2].…”

Current trends of the choice and processing of materials for dental implantation

“…Биологическая совместимость интактных образцов имплантатов из композитного углеродного волокна и их фрагментов была оценена путем подсчета прикрепившихся клеток из культуры и в митохондриальном тетразолиевом тесте -МТТ. 42 пациентам была проведена успешная одномоментная установка мостовидных протезов верхней челюсти (всего 170 имплантатов с углеволоконными структурами, по 4-6 на челюсть; периферические установлены наклонно) [30,33].…”