Status
Conditions
Treatments
About
CAD/CAM-fabricated PEEK bar exhibited greater dimensional deviation in comparison to its titanium counterpart. Nevertheless, patients with PEEK bars reported higher satisfaction levels and lower marginal bone loss when compared to those with titanium bars.
Full description
Fourteen patients with completely edentulous mandibular arch opposing natural dentition were selected and divided into two groups, seven patients in each. All patients received implant-supported hybrid prostheses with a bar fabricated by CAD/CAM milling technique. In group I (control), bar was fabricated from titanium, while in group ӀӀ, the bar was fabricated from PEEK. The evaluation of the study was done at 6 and 12 follow-up periods according to the following: 1- Experimentally by Geomagic (Geomagic, Japan) to detect any dimensional deviation of PEEK bars compared to titanium bars. 2-Clinically by questionnaire to evaluate the patient satisfaction. 3- Radiographically (digital periapical) to measure marginal bone loss around the implants.
Enrollment
Sex
Ages
Volunteers
Inclusion criteria
and normal class Ӏ maxilla-mandibular relationship with a minimum 12-15 mm inter-arch space
Exclusion criteria
All patient had systemic disorders that may influence soft or hard tissue healing were excluded as:
Primary purpose
Allocation
Interventional model
Masking
14 participants in 2 patient groups
Loading...
Data sourced from clinicaltrials.gov
Clinical trials
Research sites
Resources
Legal