Prefabricated zirconia crown versus resin-bonded composite strip crown in the restoration of primary incisors: A 36-month parallel randomized controlled trial

IF 0.6 Q4 DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE

Pediatric Dental Journal Pub Date : 2023-12-21 DOI:10.1016/j.pdj.2023.12.004

Ahmad Abdel Hamid Elheeny , Dania Ibrahem Sermani

{"title":"Prefabricated zirconia crown versus resin-bonded composite strip crown in the restoration of primary incisors: A 36-month parallel randomized controlled trial","authors":"Ahmad Abdel Hamid Elheeny , Dania Ibrahem Sermani","doi":"10.1016/j.pdj.2023.12.004","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Aim</h3><p>The trial aimed to compare the gingival health and clinical performance of prefabricated zirconia<span> crown (PZC) versus resin-bonded composite strip crowns (RCSC) in the restoration of primary maxillary incisors over 36-month.</span></p></div><div><h3>Materials and methods</h3><p><span><span><span>A parallel randomized controlled trial<span> included 200 maxillary primary incisors (100 teeth per group) restored either with PZCs or RSCS. The gingival health and plaque accumulation were assessed using </span></span>gingival index (GI) and </span>plaque index (PI) respectively. To evaluate the clinical performance, the modified United States </span>Public Health Service (USPHS) criteria were used. Intergroup comparison was performed using a Chi-square test. Restoration longevity was assessed over the predetermined intervals using Kaplan-Meier analysis. Generalized Estimating Equation (GEE) with robust standard errors was used to test the effect of time over the changes of repeated measures. The significance level was set to 5%.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>The gingival health around PZCs is significantly better than that of RCSCs after 6 months. However, at the following follow-ups, GI scores of both restorations were comparable (<em>p</em> > 0.05). All PZCs showed no plaque accumulation with a significant difference compared to the RCSCs over the follow-up intervals. The clinical performance of PZCs was significantly superior to that of RCSCs over the follow-ups in terms of retention and anatomical contour after 24 and 36 months. The survival rates of PZC and RCSC were 100% and 87% respectively.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><p>After 36 months, the gingival health of PZC and RCSC was comparable. The retention and anatomical continuity of PZC were superior compared to RCSC.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":19977,"journal":{"name":"Pediatric Dental Journal","volume":"34 1","pages":"Pages 19-26"},"PeriodicalIF":0.6000,"publicationDate":"2023-12-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Pediatric Dental Journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0917239423000617","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Abstract

Aim

The trial aimed to compare the gingival health and clinical performance of prefabricated zirconia crown (PZC) versus resin-bonded composite strip crowns (RCSC) in the restoration of primary maxillary incisors over 36-month.

Materials and methods

A parallel randomized controlled trial included 200 maxillary primary incisors (100 teeth per group) restored either with PZCs or RSCS. The gingival health and plaque accumulation were assessed using gingival index (GI) and plaque index (PI) respectively. To evaluate the clinical performance, the modified United States Public Health Service (USPHS) criteria were used. Intergroup comparison was performed using a Chi-square test. Restoration longevity was assessed over the predetermined intervals using Kaplan-Meier analysis. Generalized Estimating Equation (GEE) with robust standard errors was used to test the effect of time over the changes of repeated measures. The significance level was set to 5%.

Results

The gingival health around PZCs is significantly better than that of RCSCs after 6 months. However, at the following follow-ups, GI scores of both restorations were comparable (p > 0.05). All PZCs showed no plaque accumulation with a significant difference compared to the RCSCs over the follow-up intervals. The clinical performance of PZCs was significantly superior to that of RCSCs over the follow-ups in terms of retention and anatomical contour after 24 and 36 months. The survival rates of PZC and RCSC were 100% and 87% respectively.

Conclusions

After 36 months, the gingival health of PZC and RCSC was comparable. The retention and anatomical continuity of PZC were superior compared to RCSC.

查看原文本刊更多论文

预制氧化锆牙冠与树脂粘结复合材料条状牙冠在基牙门牙修复中的对比：为期 36 个月的平行随机对照试验

目的该试验旨在比较预制氧化锆冠（PZC）与树脂粘结复合材料条冠（RCSC）修复上颌原切牙36个月后的牙龈健康状况和临床表现。材料和方法一项平行随机对照试验包括200颗上颌原切牙（每组100颗），分别用PZC或RSCS修复。分别使用牙龈指数（GI）和牙菌斑指数（PI）评估牙龈健康状况和牙菌斑累积情况。在评估临床表现时，采用了美国公共卫生署（USPHS）的修订标准。组间比较采用卡方检验。修复寿命采用 Kaplan-Meier 分析法在预定时间间隔内进行评估。使用带有稳健标准误差的广义估计方程（GEE）来检验时间对重复测量变化的影响。结果 6 个月后，PZCs 周围的牙龈健康状况明显优于 RCSCs。然而，在随后的随访中，两种修复体的 GI 评分相当（p > 0.05）。在随访期间，所有 PZC 都没有出现斑块堆积，与 RCSC 相比差异显著。在 24 个月和 36 个月的随访期间，PZC 的临床表现在固位和解剖轮廓方面明显优于 RCSC。结论36 个月后，PZC 和 RCSC 的牙龈健康状况相当。与 RCSC 相比，PZC 的固位和解剖连续性更好。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

求助全文

约1分钟内获得全文求助全文

来源期刊