Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 480

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Cemented and screw‐retained implant reconstructions: a systematic review of the survival and complication rates

Open access
Sailer, Irena, Mühlemann, Sven, Zwahlen, Marcel, Hämmerle, Christoph H. F., Schneider, David·2012·Clinical Oral Implants Research

Abstract

Objectives: To assess the 5‐year survival rates and incidences of complications of cemented and screw‐retained implant reconstructions. Methods: An electronic Medline search complemented by manual searching was conducted to identify randomized controlled clinical trials (RCTs), and prospective and retrospective studies giving information on cemented and screw‐retained single‐unit and multiple‐unit implant reconstructions with a mean follow‐up time of at least 1 year. Assessment of the identified studies and data abstraction were performed independently by three reviewers. Failure rates were analyzed using Poisson regression models to obtain summary estimates and 95% confidence intervals of failure rates and 5‐year survival proportions. Results: Fifty‐nine clinical studies were selected from an initial yield of 4511 titles and the data were extracted. For cemented single crowns the estimated 5‐year reconstruction survival was 96.5% (95% confidence interval (CI): 94.8–97.7%), for screw‐retained single crowns it was 89.3% (95% CI: 64.9–97.1%) (P = 0.091 for difference). The 5‐year survival for cemented partial fixed dental prostheses (FDP s) was 96.9% (95% CI: 90.8–99%), similar to the one for screw‐retained partial FDP s with 98% (95% CI: 96.2–99%) (P = 0.47). For cemented full‐arch FDP s the 5‐year survival was 100% (95% CI: 88.9–100%), which was somewhat higher than that for screw‐retained FDP s with 95.8% (95% CI: 91.9–97.9%) (P = 0.54). The estimated 5‐year cumulative incidence of technical complications at cemented single crowns was 11.9% and 24.4% at screw‐retained crowns. At the partial and full‐arch FDP s, in contrast, a trend to less complication at the screw‐retained was found than at the cemented ones (partial FDP s cemented 24.5%, screw‐retained 22.1%; full‐arch FDP s cemented 62.9%, screw‐retained 54.1%). Biological complications like marginal bone loss >2 mm occurred more frequently at cemented crowns (5‐year incidence: 2.8%) than at screw‐retained ones (5‐year incidence: 0%). Conclusion: Both types of reconstructions influenced the clinical outcomes in different ways, none of the fixation methods was clearly advantageous over the other. Cemented reconstructions exhibited more serious biological complications (implant loss, bone loss >2 mm), screw‐retained reconstructions exhibited more technical problems. Screw‐retained reconstructions are more easily retrievable than cemented reconstructions and, therefore, technical and eventually biological complications can be treated more easily. For this reason and for their apparently higher biological compatibility, these reconstructions seem to be preferable.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/j.1600-0501.2012.02538.x

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 1 references

Cited by

See all 480

Metadata

Authors
Sailer, I., Mühlemann, S., Zwahlen, M., Hämmerle, C. H. F., & Schneider, D.
Venue
Clinical Oral Implants Research
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2012-10
Volume
23
Issue
s6
Pages
163-201
ISSN
  • 0905-7161 (ISSN-L)
  • 1600-0501
OpenAlex
W2028147968
Cited by
480
References
1
FWCI
3.28
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
green

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Cemented and screw‐retained implant reconstructions: a systematic review of the survival and complication rates. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1111/j.1600-0501.2012.02538.x
The paper
Sailer, I., Mühlemann, S., Zwahlen, M., Hämmerle, C. H. F., & Schneider, D. (2012). Cemented and screw‐retained implant reconstructions: a systematic review of the survival and complication rates. Clinical Oral Implants Research. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0501.2012.02538.x

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.