Related Experiment Video
Updated: Sep 2, 2025
Measuring the Complete-arch Distortion of an Optical Dental Impression
Published on: May 30, 2019
Digitally prefabricated versus conventionally fabricated implant-supported full-arch provisional prosthesis: a
Chaoqun Chen1, Haiyan Lai1, Huiyong Zhu1
1Department of Stomatology, The First Affiliated Hospital, College of Medicine, Zhejiang University, #79 Qingchun Road, Hangzhou, 310003, Zhejiang Province, People's Republic of China.
Background:
To evaluate and compare the clinical outcomes of digitally prefabricated and conventionally fabricated implant-supported full-arch provisional prostheses.
Methods:
In this retrospective study, a total of 39 patients (22 males and 17 females) who underwent implant-supported full-arch rehabilitation using the All-on-4 concept with an immediate loading protocol were included: 20 patients treated with digitally prefabricated provisional prostheses were assigned into Group A, and 19 patients treated with conventionally fabricated provisional prostheses were assigned into Group B. Implant/provisional prosthesis survival rates and complications were reviewed. Marginal bone loss (MBL) was investigated by CBCT. Surgical time, restorative time, and total operative time were analyzed. Postoperative pain and swelling were evaluated with the visual analog scale (VAS). The oral health impact profile (OHIP) questionnaire was administered before and after surgery.
Results:
The implant/provisional prosthesis survival rate was 100%, and complications appeared with low frequency in both groups, while the mean MBL was 0.30 ± 0.29 mm in Group A and 0.31 ± 0.41 mm in Group B after 3~ 6 months (P > 0.05). The average restorative time in Group A (116.16 ± 16.61 min) was significantly shorter than that in Group B (242.11 ± 30.14 min) (P < 0.05). Patients in Group A showed lower pain/swelling VAS scores after surgery than Group B (P < 0.05). Low OHIP scores with high satisfaction with the overall effects were shown in both groups.
Conclusion:
Prefabricated prostheses reduced the prosthetic time and postoperative discomfort in patients whose immediate rehabilitation was based on the All-on-4 concept. This prefabrication technology may be a predictable alternative to improve the short-term clinical outcome of implant-supported full-arch provisional rehabilitation.
