Loading...
Publication
Prevalência de complicações técnicas e biológicas na reabilitação implanto-suportada em prótese cimentada: revisão sistemática
| Name: | Description: | Size: | Format: | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| PPG_35517 | 732.43 KB | Adobe PDF |
Advisor(s)
Abstract(s)
Objetivos: Analisar as complicações técnicas e biológicas na reabilitação em prótese implanto suportada cimentada.
Métodos: Foi elaborada uma revisão bibliográfica recorrendo às bases de dados informáticas
da PubMed (utilizando a MeSH). Esta pesquisa foi sujeita a aplicação de critérios de inclusão
e exclusão. Deste modo, apenas os artigos de revisão, meta-análise e estudos foram abrangidos.
Resultados: Analisaram-se 5 revisões sistemáticas, 1 meta-análise e 1 revisão sistemática com
meta-análise, comparando os dois tipos de retenção aparafusada e cimentada e as suas
complicações técnicas e biológicas. Todos os parâmetros clínicos observados foram descritos.
Conclusões: Após as conclusões obtidas podemos afirmar que a prótese implanto-suportada
cimentada apresenta mais complicações biológicas e menos complicações técnicas.
Objectives: Analyze the technical and biological complications of rehabilitation in cement retained implant-supported prostheses. Methods: A bibliographic review was prepared by using PubMed’s computer databases (applying MeSH). This research was subject to the application of inclusion and exclusion criteria. Therefore, only review articles, meta-analysis and studies were included. Results: 5 systematic reviews, 1 meta-analysis and 1 systematic reviews with meta-analysis were analyzed, comparing the two types of screw-retained and cemented retention and their technical and biological complications. The observed clinical parameters were described. Conclusions: After the conclusions obtained, we can affirm that the cement retained implant supported prothesis has more biological complications and less technical complications.
Objectives: Analyze the technical and biological complications of rehabilitation in cement retained implant-supported prostheses. Methods: A bibliographic review was prepared by using PubMed’s computer databases (applying MeSH). This research was subject to the application of inclusion and exclusion criteria. Therefore, only review articles, meta-analysis and studies were included. Results: 5 systematic reviews, 1 meta-analysis and 1 systematic reviews with meta-analysis were analyzed, comparing the two types of screw-retained and cemented retention and their technical and biological complications. The observed clinical parameters were described. Conclusions: After the conclusions obtained, we can affirm that the cement retained implant supported prothesis has more biological complications and less technical complications.
Description
Keywords
Prótese dentária, implanto-suportada Retenção de próteses dentárias Falha na restauração dentária Pilares dentários Dental prosthesis, implant-supported Dental prosthesis retention Dental restoration failure Dental abutments