Table 2 Clinical studies included in the review
From: The use of PEEK in digital prosthodontics: A narrative review
Study (Year) | Study design | Intervention | Outcome |
|---|---|---|---|
Parmigiani-Izquierdo et al. (2017) [51] | Case report | Zirconia implants restored with milled PEEK frameworks veneered with composite resin for the replacement of upper molars | Cushioning of occlusal loads while chewing Viable solution for patients with intolerance to metal alloys |
Cabello-Dominguez et al. (2019) [52] | Case report | Monolithic zirconia fixed prosthesis in the maxilla and PEEK framework with gingival composite resin combined with lithium disilicate crowns in the mandible for the rehabilitation of a completely edentulous patient | The reduced weight and modulus of elasticity of PEEK could reduce the risk of mechanical complications Higher cost than metal-ceramic or metal-acrylic restoration |
Zoidis (2018) [4] | Case report | PEEK implant framework material in combination with prefabricated PMMA veneers for the fabrication of a complete maxillary arch implant-supported fixed restoration | Esthetic outcome comparable with that of ceramic restoration After 2 years, no sign of screw loosening, veneering material chipping, wear, or staining |
Harb et al. (2019) [53] | Case report | Milled PEEK framework combined with acrylic resin denture teeth and heat-cured acrylic resin denture for Kennedy Class I RPD fabrication | Adequate fit and good patient satisfaction in terms of function and esthetics |
Costa-Palau et al. (2014) [54] | Case report | Milled PEEK framework for the fabrication of a maxillary obturator prosthesis | Compared to conventional obturators PEEK frameworks permit the fabrication of lighter prostheses with improved retention, function and esthetics |
Mangano et al. (2019) [55] | Clinical study | Combining Intraoral and Face Scans for the Design and Fabrication of CAD-CAM PEEK Implant-Supported Bars for Maxillary Overdentures (15 patients) | After a year in function 100% implant survival 80% success rate |
Spies et al. (2018) [56] | Case report | Implant-supported overdenture with the receptor part of the bar milled from PEEK polymerized into a zirconia framework for the rehabitation of an edentulous patient | High patient satisfaction with function and esthetics after 6 months |
Hahnel et al. (2018) [57] | Case report | Primary CoCr copings and secondary CAD-CAM PEEK framework veneered with composite resin for the fabrication of double-crown-retained interim removable dental prosthesis | Biocompatibilityand low weight no complications after 3 months |
Siewert (2018) [58] | Case report | Primary zirconia copings and secondary PEEK framework veneered with monolithic zirconia for the rehabilitation of an edentulous patient with intolerance to titanium | High chewing comfort Dampening of chewing forces |
Beretta et al. (2019) [10] | Randomized clinical trial | Comparison of CAD-CAM fabricated customized healing abutments and standard healing caps placed at the surgical stage for the creation of the desired emergence profile (n = 10/group) | After a healing period of 1–3 months Patients with PEEK customized healing abutments showed higher functional implant prosthodontics score (FIPS) and lower numerical rating scale (NRS) values |