Print page Print page
Switch language
The Capital Region of Denmark - a part of Copenhagen University Hospital

Implant-supported 2-unit cantilevers compared with single crowns on adjacent implants: A comparative retrospective case series

Research output: Contribution to journalJournal articleResearchpeer-review

  1. The sandwich osteotomy technique to treat vertical alveolar bone defects prior to implant placement: a systematic review

    Research output: Contribution to journalReviewResearchpeer-review

  2. Tissue changes at implant sites in the anterior maxilla with and without connective tissue grafting: A five-year prospective study

    Research output: Contribution to journalJournal articleResearchpeer-review

  3. Timing af implantatindsættelse efter traumebetinget tandtab

    Research output: Contribution to journalJournal articleResearchpeer-review

View graph of relations

STATEMENT OF PROBLEM: The replacement of 2 adjacent missing teeth remains a clinical challenge. Among the different treatment options, the use of a single implant to support a 2-unit cantilever fixed dental prosthesis (FDP) has been proposed in situations of limited mesiodistal space, even though the evidence for its use is low.

PURPOSE: The purpose of this retrospective comparative case series was to evaluate hard and soft peri-implant tissues in patients with 2 adjacent missing teeth in the anterior area (incisors or canines) rehabilitated with implant-supported 2-unit cantilevers or single crowns on adjacent implants.

MATERIAL AND METHODS: Twenty-three from a cohort of 34 patients rehabilitated with 2-implant systems between September 2006 and November 2015 with 2-unit cantilever FDPs (test group) (n=16) or 2 adjacent dental implants supporting single crowns (control group) (n=7) were available for follow-up. At the baseline and follow-up examinations, the implant survival rate, peri-implant probing pocket depth, marginal bone level (MBL), as well as papilla scores and prosthetic outcomes from the Copenhagen Index Score were recorded and evaluated.

RESULTS: One implant in the control group was lost during the observation period, leading to an overall implant survival rate of 97%. Mean peri-implant probing depths were low (≤5 mm) in both the groups. Stable marginal bone levels were detected around adjacent implants and around implants supporting cantilevers. Medium to high esthetic scores were obtained in most patients. Papilla index scores were high (score 1 and 2) in both the groups. Finally, no technical complications were recorded.

CONCLUSIONS: The use of a single-implant-supported 2-unit cantilever FDP in anterior sites is a valid treatment option compared with 2 adjacent implants, especially when the available mesiodistal space is limited.

Original languageEnglish
JournalThe Journal of prosthetic dentistry
Issue number5
Pages (from-to)717-723
Publication statusPublished - May 2020

    Research areas

  • Alveolar Bone Loss, Crowns, Dental Implants, Dental Prosthesis Design, Dental Prosthesis, Implant-Supported, Esthetics, Dental, Follow-Up Studies, Humans, Prospective Studies, Retrospective Studies, Treatment Outcome

ID: 61652169