The effect of BioHPP versus Zirconia CAD/CAM-fabricated fixed-detachable prosthesis rehabilitating single maxillary arches on the peri-implant bone level changes

Mona Aboelnagga,Omar El Sadat
DOI: https://doi.org/10.21608/omx.2022.134671.1160
2022-01-01
Abstract:Purpose: The objective of this study was to compare the use of BioHPP and zirconia CAD/CAM fabricated materials inimplant supported maxillary fixed-detachable prosthesis opposing dentate mandibular arch, where peri-implants bone levelchanges were evaluated for two years.Materials and method: Ten patients with edentulous single maxilla opposing dentate mandibular arch were selected toshare in this study. For all patients, proper planning for implant placement was made where the participants were randomlyallocated into two groups five patients in each group. Six implants were inserted guided by the sterolithographic surgical guidefollowing flapless surgical approach. Immediate loading protocol was followed, where the milled acrylic temporary prosthesis,which was planned for each patient according to the computer software, was screwed to the implants. After 4 months, thefinal restoration was placed according to the following grouping. In group I, patients were rehabilitated with fixed-detachablezirconium restoration while in group II patients were rehabilitated with fixed-detachable BioHpp Peek restoration. Peri-implantmarginal bone changes were evaluated at loading time, after 6 month, 1 and 2 years follow up visits. Data collected weretabulated and statistically analyzed.Results: In intragroup comparisons, peri implant bone loss was significant. Where in group I, the mean value of peri–implantbone height change measures from implants insertion to 6 month was 0.35 mm, from insertion to 12 months was 0.62 mm whilefrom insertion to 24 months follow up was found to be 0.96 mm. While in group II at same time intervals were 0.39 mm, 0.69mm and 1.23 mm respectively. On the other hand in intergroup comparison, to compare the mean amount of peri-implant boneheight changes in the two studied groups during the follow up intervals, student t test was performed and showed that group IIhad a non significant higher bone loss.Conclusion: Based on these results and within the limitation of this study. Both Zirconia and BioHpp when used as frameworkmaterial for fixed-detachable maxillary single prosthesis had successful results on the supporting implants. However, BioHppfixed-detachable prosthesis had higher effect on the peri-implant marginal bone loss but it was not of statistical significance.
What problem does this paper attempt to address?