A 13-Year Follow-Up of a full mouth rehabilitation using a fixed PFM bridge opposing an acrylic veneered implant supported hybrid prosthesis

Abstract

This case report presents a 13-year follow-up of a patient rehabilitated with maxillary and mandibular prostheses made of dissimilar materials to address the differing aesthetic and functional demands in each arch. In the maxilla a fixed telescopic crown-retained porcelain fused to metal (PFM) prosthesis was fabricated which opposed a mandibular implant-supported acrylic veneered hybrid prosthesis. A 51-year-old female initially presented with functional andaesthetic concerns as a result of a fractured maxillary
provisional restoration spanning from the 13-23, pain on the 13, and failing crown and bridgework on her remaining maxillary teeth. This was opposed by an acrylic provisional immediately-loaded implant supported hybrid prosthesis that had been placed in 2009. She was rehabilitated using telescopic-crowns supporting a fixed porcelain fused to metal (PFM) bridge, and an acrylic veneered implant
supported prostheses. In the 13 years of follow-up, both prostheses have shown excellent longevity with the maxillary prosthesis having had only one incident of de-cementation, and the prosthesis needing repair/replacement of the veneering material and screw-access-hole closure on two occasions in 2018 and 2022. This report highlights the efficacy and long term success of using prostheses made with different materials and techniques in each arch in complex rehabilitation cases.