Citation: Vlahova, A., et al. Implant-Supported Screw-Re- tained Vs Cemented Single Crown Fabricated By CAD / CAM Technology: A Clinical Case Report. (2018) J Dent Oral Care 4(1): 5- 7. Copyright: © 2018 Vlahova, A . This is an Open access article distributed under the terms of Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License. DOI: 10.15436/2379-1705.18.1685 Received Date: September 13, 2017 Accepted Date: March 19, 2018 Published Date: March 23, 2018 Research Article *Corresponding author: Assoc. Prof. Angelina Vlahova, Department of Prosthetic Dentistry, Faculty of Dental Medicine, Medical University– Plovdiv, Bulgaria, Tel: +359888773670/ +358895428170; E-mail: a_vlahova@yahoo.com page no: 5/7 www.ommegaonline.org Vol:4 Issue: 1 Abstract: CAD/CAM technologies in Dental Implantology present opportunities for preliminary implant planning, surgical tem- plate design, guided surgery and fabrication of immediate and permanent implant-supported restorations. The aim of this publication is to compare two types of implant-supported single crowns–screw-retained and cemented, illustrated with a clinical case. Advantages and disadvantages of the both types of restorations are described. The choice between screw-retained and cemented implant-supported restoration is individual and depends on each clinical case. Introduction Nowadays CAD/CAM technologies in Dental Implan- tology present opportunities for preliminary implant planning and surgical template design [1,2] , guided surgery [3] and fabrication of immediate and permanent implant-supported restorations [4] . Implant-supported single crown restorationis consid- ered as a simple and easy clinical case [5] . There are two main mo- dalities-screw-retained and cemented modifcations [6,7] . When comparing types, survival and complication rates as well as bone and soft-tissue levels, they are similar [8] . The CAD/CAM ceramics based on zirconium dioxide ofers esthetic advantages for the two selections [9,10] . Zirconia abutments with bonded tita- nium bases provide esthetic alternatives to titanium abutments for both choices [11] . Bone- and soft-tissue responses are equiv- alent, but residual cement of cement-retained restorations is as- sociated with signifcant soft and hard-tissue complications [12,13] . Screw-related complications are the main risk for the screw-re- tained modifcation [14] . CAD/CAM design and fabrication have some peculiar- ities and need additional accessorie [15] . Scan body or scan fag is needed for the scanning process–intra oral or laboratory (on a working cast with implant analogue). Factory made titanium base has to be extra orally cemented on the fnal restoration–in- dividual abutment or screw-retained crown. The aim of this publication is to compare two types of implant-supported single crown–screw-retained and cemented, illustrated with a clinical case. Materials and methods A patient with a single implant Osseo integrated in the area of the frst lower frst molar came in the CAD/CAM Cen- ter in FDM-Plovdiv. The implant type was Alfa Bio Tec, SPI modifcation, with 10 mm length and 3,75 mm diameter. An im- plant-supported single crown made by CAD/CAM technology of ceramics based on zirconium dioxide was chosen as a type of restoration. Preliminary intra oral scanning with TRIOS Intra oral Scanner, 3 Shape was performed after removal of the tissue forming screw (the emergence profle) and with a scan body [Figure 1]. The restoration was designed with the help of the computer software 3 Shape Dental System 2017 (Implant Studio application). First option was individual abutment with a crown on it [Figure 2] and the second – monolithic screw-retained sin- gle crown [Figure 3]. After fnalizing the design all the restorations were milled of non-sintered ZrO 2 ceramics, removed, cleaned and im- mersed in coloring liquid for 30 sec. Pre-Dry and Sintering Ther- mal Cycles in the ceramic furnace were performed, followed by slow cooling, fnal staining and glazing of the crowns. Factory made titanium base Alfa Bio Tec Ti-Base was necessary in order to fx the restorations on the implant. Journal of Dentistry and Oral Care ISSN: 2379-1705 OPEN ACCESS Implant-Supported Screw-Retained Vs Cemented Single Crown Fabricated By CAD / CAM Technology: A Clinical Case Report Angelina Vlahova*, Viktor Hadzhigaev, ZlatinaTomova, RadaKazakova, Stefan Zlatev Department of Prosthetic Dentistry, Faculty of Dental Medicine, Medical University, Plovdiv, Bulgaria