Abstract:Purpose: This study aimed to compare the clinical and radiographic outcomes of single posterior screw-retained monolithic implant crowns following a digital and conventional workflow and to report on the survival/complication rate after a mean 4-year follow-up. Materials and Methods: Thirty patients with a single posterior tooth missing were rehabilitated with a bone-level implant. After a healing period of ≥3 months, they were subjected to both a digital and conventional workflow to fabricate two screw-retained monolithic implant crowns. The quantitative clinical adjustments to both crowns (intrasubject comparison) and a questionnaire were recorded at try-in. Thereafter, a crown of the digital and conventional workflows was randomly inserted. At the last follow-up, the marginal bone level (MBL), peri-implant health-related parameters (bleeding on probing (BoP), plaque, pocket probing depth (PPD)), and functional implant prosthodontic score (FIPS) were assessed. Furthermore, the implant survival and success rates and technical complications were evaluated. Results: A total of 27 patients were followed for a mean period of 4.23 ± 1.10 years. There was no significant difference between the digital and conventional workflows regarding clinical adjustments and questionnaire outcomes. More than twice as many participants recommended digital (n = 16) compared to conventional impressions (n = 7) to friends. The implant survival and success rate were 100% and 96.3%, respectively. Furthermore, two de-cementations and one fracture of the ti-base abutment occurred. There were no significant differences in BoP, plaque, and PPD metrics between the two groups. The changes in the MBL between implant crown insertion (baseline) and the last follow-up were 0.07 ± 0.19 mm and 0.34 ± 0.62 mm in the digital and conventional groups, respectively (p = 0.195). The mean overall FIPS score was 8.11 ± 1.37 (range: 5–10). Conclusions: The clinical and radiographic outcomes of single screw-retained monolithic implant crowns were similar between both workflows after a mean of 4 years of service. The patients did not clearly prefer an impression technique for their restoration, although they would recommend the digital impression more often to friends. Thus, decision regarding clinical workflows may be based on the patient's and/or clinician's preference.

Clinical and Radiographic Evaluation of Short Locking-Taper Implants Supporting Single Crowns in the Posterior Region: A 12-Year Retrospective Study.

Clinical Evaluation of Short and Wide-Diameter Implants Immediately Placed into Extraction Sockets of Posterior Areas: A 2-Year Retrospective Study

Retrospective Study of Short Versus Standard Posterior Implants and Analysis of Implant Failure Risk Factors

Long-term outcomes of short dental implants supporting single crowns in posterior region: a clinical retrospective study of 5-10 years.

Retrospective study on the clinical outcomes of small-diameter implants supporting fixed prostheses without bone augmentation in the posterior region after two to twelve years

A Prospective, Multicentre Study of 6-Mm Short Implants in Posterior Alveolar Bone Supporting Splinted Crowns: A 5-Year Follow-Up Study.

Survival and Complication Rates of Short Implants‐supported Single Crowns in the Posterior Regions with High Crown‐implant Ration (C I)‐ A 10‐year Retrospective Study

Short and ultra‐short (<6‐mm) locking‐taper implants supporting single crowns in posterior areas (part II): A 5‐year retrospective study on periodontally healthy patients and patients with a history of periodontitis

Retrospective Study on the Clinical Outcomes of Small-Diameter Implants Supporting Fixed Prostheses Without Bone Augmentation in the Posterior Region after 2 to 12 Years

Assessment of Peri-Implant Soft Tissues Conditions around Short and Ultra-Short Implant-Supported Single Crowns: A 3-Year Retrospective Study on Periodontally Healthy Patients and Patients with a History of Periodontal Disease

Influence of crown-to-implant ratio and different prosthetic designs on the clinical conditions of short implants in posterior regions: A 4-year retrospective clinical and radiographic study.

Peri-Implant Conditions And Marginal Bone Loss Around Cemented And Screw-Retained Single Implant Crowns In Posterior Regions: A Retrospective Cohort Study With Up To 4 Years Follow-Up

Ten-Year Performance of Posterior 6-mm Implants with Single-Tooth Restorations: A Randomized Controlled Trial

Single crown restorations supported by 6‐mm implants in the resorbed posterior mandible: A 10‐year prospective case series

Long-term outcomes of narrow diameter implants in posterior jaws: A retrospective study with at least 8-year follow-up.

Short Versus Longer Implants with Osteotome Sinus Floor Elevation for Moderately Atrophic Posterior Maxillae: A 1-Year Randomized Clinical Trial.

[A Long-Term Retrospective Clinical Study of Short Dental Implant Restoration].

Four-Year Follow-Up of a Randomized Controlled Clinical Trial

Prefabricated shouldered abutments enable successful restoration of molar crowns on implants

A prospective, multi-center study assessing early loading with short implants in posterior regions. A 3-year post-loading follow-up study.

A 7-Year Clinical and 5-Year Radiographical Prospective Study