Patient Satisfaction , Prosthetic Complications and Clinical Outcomes of PEEK Composite Versus Titanium Zirconium

Patient Satisfaction , Prosthetic Complication and Clinical Outcomes of PEEK Composite Versus Titanium Zirconium Maxillary Fixed Full Arch Prosthetic Opposing Mandibular Distal Extension Partial Denture

This study aimed to evaluate patient satisfaction (VAS) , prosthetic outcomes and clinical outcomes of polyether ether ketone (PEEK) Versus Titanium Zirconium fixed prostheses supported by six maxillary implants and opposed by distal extension removable partial denture.

thirty patients were selected for this study from a previous study who have already received previous implants in the maxillary arch. The patients were divided into two groups: Group1 received maxillary titanium zirconium full arch fixed prosthesis and mandibular distal extension partial denture, Group 2 received maxillary PEEK composite full arch fixed prosthesis and mandibular distal extension partial denture Patient satisfaction was evaluated using visual analogue scale (VAS) after one year months , Prosthetic complications were measured on the patient and implant levels after one year

Inclusion Criteria:

Normal jaw relation Good oral hygiene Patient with class I or class II inter-rach space in order to have sufficient restoration space to construct FP3 prosthesis.

Exclusion Criteria:

Patients with TMJ disorder and heavy smokers for more than 10 cigarettes per day.

Uncooperative patient. Unfavorable occlusion. Limited restoration space (less than 12 mm).