الفهرس 
INTRODUCTIONOnly 14 pages are availabe for public view
 |  | from | 162 |  |  |
| | | from | 162 | | |
Abstract
Treatment of completely edentulous patients is primarily done for the sake of restoring function and esthetics. Therefore, patients are always seeking satisfactory results with the least
possible postoperative course of complications and pleasant function. This can be perfectly achieved using implant supported restorations. Different types of restorations have been used as a full arch fixed option, however the most commonly used is single unit screw retained restoration. Usually, the abutments used to support this type of restorations are multi-unit
abutments. In our study a newly introduced abutment called OT bridge system is used. It overcomes one of the major drawbacks of multiunit abutments which is passivity and the credit
goes to the Seeger system used in it. Supporting the restoration on splinted abutments or nonsplinted abutments have been a controversy issue with no definitive consensus yet.
In this randomized clinical trial twelve completely edentulous patients (2 females and 10 males) were treated with 48 implants loaded with a temporary acrylic conversion denture.
Patients were randomly assigned to be either treated with splinted OT bridge abutments (n=24 implants) supporting a full arch fixed restoration or non-splinted ones (n=24 implants). The
marginal bone loss around the implants were evaluated using digital periapical radiographs following the parallel cone technique and analyzed by the Digora system. After 3 months follow-up period a statistically significant difference in marginal bone height existed between
baseline at implant placement and after the healing period in both groups. However, on comparing both groups after the healing period there was no statistically significant difference
between splinting or unsplinting of the abutments in regards to bone height level. Also, a statistically significant difference existed in each implant between baseline and 3 months
follow-up measurements within each group regarding marginal bone loss. Moreover, there was no statistically significant difference existed between the two groups regarding the implant failure in the early phase of healing. In conclusion, both splinting or unsplinting techniques are
considered as reliable methods for immediate loading of a full arch screw retained implant restoration as a treatment for completely edentulous patients with no statistically significant difference in marginal bone loss between groups and implant failure, and with significant difference between base line and 3 months in each group at the level of each implant and with
adding all of them together.