The Framework Used in All-on-Four Systems

protetikdistedavisi-10-1-2024-kapak

Şeyma YAVUZa , Zeynep ŞAHİNa

aLokman Hekim University Faculty of Dentistry, Department of Prosthodontics, Ankara, Türkiye

ABSTRACT
The All-on-Four system is one of the rehabilitation systems utilised in the treatment of edentulous patients. This review discusses the literature on framework materials for all-on-four systems. The keywords ”all on four”, ”all-on-four”, ”all on 4”, ”all-on-4”, ”prosthetic framework”, ”PEEK” and ”framework” and various combinations of these keywords were used in searches on Pubmed, Google Scholar and Cochrane Library from 2013 to 2023. The All-on-Four systems’ framework materials are critical to the success of the prosthesis, the strength of the material, the amount of the force transferred to the bone, the reaction of the transferred force in the biological tissue and the accumulation of stresses. While the framework material PEEK is known for its superior elasticity and flexibility, zirconia has been observed to result in comparatively less bone loss in the peri-implant collar. These data provide clinicians the opportunity to make evidence-based decisions when selecting framework materials for All-on-Four systems.
Keywords: Dental implants; dental prosthesis, implant-supported; polyetheretherketone

Referanslar

  1. Shash YH, Elwakad MT, Eldosoky MAA, Dohiem MM. Evaluation of stress and strain on mandible caused by changing the bar material in hybrid prosthesis utilizing "All-on-Four" technique. Alexandria Eng J. 2023;62:129-43. [Crossref]
  2. Cabello G, González DG, Fábrega J. The Edentulous Maxillary Arch: A Novel Approach To Prosthetic Rehabilitation With Dental Implants, Based Upon The Combination Of Optimum Mechanical Resources. Dentistry. 2014;4(4):1.
  3. Tribst JPM, de Morais DC, de Matos JDM, Lopes GDRS, Dal Piva AMDO, Souto Borges AL, et al. Influence of Framework Material and Posterior Implant Angulation in Full-Arch All-on-4 Implant-Supported Prosthesis Stress Concentration. Dent J. 2022;10(1):1-15. [Crossref]  [PubMed]  [PMC]
  4. Babbush C A, Kanawati A, Kotsakis GA, Hinrichs JE. Patient-related and financial outcomes analysis of conventional full-arch rehabilitation versus the All-on-4 concept: a cohort study. Implant Dent. 2014;23(2):218-24. [Crossref]  [PubMed]
  5. Kelkar K, Bhat V, Hegde C. Finite element analysis of the effect of framework materials at the bone-implant interface in the all-on-four implant system. Dent Res J (Isfahan). 2021;18(1):1-7. [Crossref]  [PubMed]
  6. Soto-Peñaloza D, Zaragozí-Alonso R, Peñarrocha-Diago M, Peñarrocha-Diago M. The all-on-four treatment concept: Systematic review. J Clin Exp Dent. 2017;9(3):474-88. [Crossref]  [PubMed]  [PMC]
  7. Patzelt SBM, Bahat O, Reynolds MA, Strub JR. The all-on-four treatment concept: A systematic review. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res. 2014;16(6):836-55. [Crossref]  [PubMed]
  8. Egilmez F, Ergun G, Cekic-Nagas I, Bozkaya S. Implant-supported hybrid prosthesis: Conventional treatment method for borderline cases. Eur J Dent. 2015;9(3):442-8. [Crossref]  [PubMed]  [PMC]
  9. Di P, Lin Y, Li J, Luo J, Qiu L X, Chen B, et al. The All-on-Four Implant Therapy Protocol in the Management of Edentulous Chinese Patients. Int J Prosthodont. 2013;26(6):509-16. [Crossref]  [PubMed]
  10. Ayna M, Gülses A, Acil Y. A comparative study on 7-year results of "All-on-FourTM" immediate-function concept for completely edentulous mandibles: metal-ceramic vs. bar-retained superstructures. Odontology. 2018;106(1):73-82. [Crossref]  [PubMed]
  11. Durkan R, Oyar P, Deste G. Maxillary and mandibular all-on-four implant designs: A review. Niger J Clin Pract. 2019;22(8):1033-40. [Crossref]  [PubMed]
  12. Shetty R, I Singh HS, Jafer MA, Bhandi S, Raj A, Patil S, et al. Effect of Prosthetic Framework Material, Cantilever Length and Opposing Arch on Peri-Implant Strain in an All-on-Four Implant Prostheses. Niger J Clin Pract. 2021;24(6):866-73. [Crossref]  [PubMed]
  13. Ergun G, Köle Ş. Provisional Prosthesis Options and Fabrication Techniques in All-on-Four Implant Applications. Türkiye Klin. 2022:39-48.
  14. G Deste RD. Effects of All‑on‑four Implant Designs in Mandible on Implants and the Surrounding Bone: A 3‑D Finite Element Analysis. Niger J Clin Pract. 2020;23(1):456-63. [Crossref]  [PubMed]
  15. Bhering CLB, Mesquita MF, Kemmoku DT, Noritomi PY, Consani RLX, Barão VAR. Comparison between all-on-four and all-on-six treatment concepts and framework material on stress distribution in atrophic maxilla: A prototyping guided 3D-FEA study. Mater Sci Eng C. 2016;69:715-25. [Crossref]  [PubMed]
  16. Sılva VA, Fonseca AH de A, Fonseca DR, Seraıdarıan PI. Biomechanical development and evaluation of a new framework for all-on-four rehabilitation. Rev Odontol da UNESP. 2019;48:1-10. [Crossref]
  17. Taruna M. Prosthodontic Perspective to All- On-4 ® Concept for Dental Implants. J Clin Diagnostic Res. 2014;8(10):16-9. [Crossref]  [PubMed]  [PMC]
  18. Bidez MW, Misch CE. Clinical Biomechanics in Implant Dentistry. Resnik RR, ed. Misch's Contemporary Implant Dentistry. 4th ed. Elsevier; 2021.p.140-51.
  19. Singh R, Sharma S, Sultan K, Dadwal R, Kaushal A, Mongra A. Concept of all on four for dental implants: A review. P Int J Maxillofac Imaging. 2020;6(4):93-6. [Crossref]
  20. Ahmadi A, Dörsam I, Stark H, Hersey S, Bourauel C, Keilig L. The all-on-4 concept in the maxilla-A biomechanical analysis involving high performance polymers. J Biomed Mater Res-Part B Appl Biomater. 2021;109(11):1698-705. [Crossref]  [PubMed]
  21. Zoidis P. The all-on-4 modified polyetheretherketone treatment approach: A clinical report. J Prosthet Dent. 2018;119(4):516-21. [Crossref]  [PubMed]
  22. Türker N, Büyükkaplan US, Sadowsky SJ, Özarslan MM. Finite Element Stress Analysis of Applied Forces to Implants and Supporting Tissues Using the "All-on-Four" Concept with Different Occlusal Schemes. J Prosthodont. 2019;28(2):185-94. [Crossref]  [PubMed]
  23. Pozzan MC, Grande F, Mochi Zamperoli E, Tesini F, Carossa M, Catapano S. Assessment of Preload Loss after Cyclic Loading in the OT Bridge System in an "All-on-Four" Rehabilitation Model in the Absence of One and Two Prosthesis Screws. Materials (Basel). 2022;15(4):1582. [Crossref]  [PubMed]  [PMC]
  24. Kolinski M, Hess P, Leziy S, Friberg B, Bellucci G, Trisciuoglio D, et al. Immediate provisionalization in the esthetic zone: 1-year interim results from a prospective single-cohort multicenter study evaluating 3.0-mm-diameter tapered implants. Clin Oral Investig. 2018;22(6):2299-308. [Crossref]  [PubMed]
  25. Haroun F, Ozan O. Evaluation of stresses on implant, bone, and restorative materials caused by different opposing arch materials in hybrid prosthetic restorations using the all-on-4 technique. Materials (Basel). 2021;14(15). [Crossref]  [PubMed]  [PMC]
  26. TRİNİA [Internet]. TRINIA™: The Next Generation of CAD/CAM and Metal-Free Restorations. 2016 [Cited: 11 July 2023]. Available from: [Link]
  27. Chand YB, Mahendra J, Jigeesh N, Mahendra L, Shivasubramanian L, Perika SB. Comparison of Stress Distribution and Deformation of Four Prosthetic Materials in Full-mouth Rehabilitation with Implants: A Three-dimensional Finite Element Study. J Contemp Dent Pract. 2020;21(11):1210-7. [Crossref]  [PubMed]
  28. Delucchi F, De Giovanni E, Pesce P, Bagnasco F, Pera F, Baldi D, et al. Framework materials for full-arch implant-supported rehabilitations: A systematic review of clinical studies. Materials (Basel). 2021;14(12):1-18. [Crossref]  [PubMed]  [PMC]
  29. Güçlü ZB, Gürbüz A, Deste Gökay G, Durkan R, Oyar P. Mechanical response of different frameworks for maxillary all-on-four implant- supported fixed dental prosthesis: 3D finite element analysis. Anal Biomed Eng Tech. 2022;67(5):419-28. [Crossref]  [PubMed]
  30. Gürbüz A, Güçlü ZB, Deste Gökay G, Durkan R. Biomechanical comparison of different prosthetic materials and posterior implant angles in all-on-4 treatment concept by three-dimensional finite element analysis. Biomed Eng Tech. 2022;67(4):307-15. [Crossref]  [PubMed]  [PMC]
  31. Maló P, de Araújo Nobre M, Moura Guedes C, Almeida R, Silva A, Sereno N, et al. Short-term report of an ongoing prospective cohort study evaluating the outcome of full-arch implant-supported fixed hybrid polyetheretherketone-acrylic resin prostheses and the All-on-Four concept. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res. 2018;20(5):692-702. [Crossref]  [PubMed]
  32. Yüzükcü AEK, Yerliyurt K. How important are the implant inclination and the infrastructure material used in implant supported fixed prostheses? Cumhur Dent J. 2021;24(4):395-402. [Crossref]
  33. de Araújo Nobre M, Lopes A, Antunes E. The 10 Year Outcomes of Implants Inserted with Dehiscence or Fenestrations in the Rehabilitation of Completely Edentulous Jaws with the All-on-4 Concept. J Clin Med. 2022;11(7): 1939. [Crossref]  [PubMed]  [PMC]
  34. Lee K-S, Shin S-W, Lee S-P, Kim J-E, Kim J-H, Lee J-Y. Comparative Evaluation of a Four-Implant-Supported Polyetherketoneketone Framework Prosthesis: A Three-Dimensional Finite Element Analysis Based on Cone Beam Computed Tomography and Computer-Aided Design. Int J Prosthodont. 2017;30(6):581-5. [Crossref]  [PubMed]
  35. Çalışkan A, Yöndem İ. Stress Analysis Of Fixed Dental Prostheses Produced With Different Materials According To The All-On-Four Concept. J Biotechnol Strateg Heal Res. 2019;3(3):183-91. [Crossref]