Full-ceramic resin-bonded fixed dental prostheses: A systematic review.

IF 3.1 4区 医学 Q2 BIOPHYSICS
Sareh Habibzadeh, Faranak Khamisi, Seyed Ali Mosaddad, Gustavo Vicentis de Oliveira Fernandes, Artak Heboyan
{"title":"Full-ceramic resin-bonded fixed dental prostheses: A systematic review.","authors":"Sareh Habibzadeh, Faranak Khamisi, Seyed Ali Mosaddad, Gustavo Vicentis de Oliveira Fernandes, Artak Heboyan","doi":"10.1177/22808000241250118","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Despite the development of implant-supported prostheses, there are still patients for whom conservative treatments such as resin-bonded fixed dental prostheses (RBFDPs) are more appropriate. This study's objective was to analyze the available research on full-ceramic RBFDPs. In this study, Web of Science, MEDLINE/PubMed, Scopus, Embase, Cochrane Library, and Google Scholar databases were searched for articles published in English between 2010 and 2020. A total of 14 studies were reviewed based on the eligibility criteria. The results showed that using a cantilever design with one abutment had an advantage over two abutments. Additionally, it was proposed that preparations designed with retentive aids, such as a proximal box, groove, and pinhole, could improve RBFDP survival rates. IPS e.max ZirCAD, In-Ceram alumina, and zirconia CAD/CAM were the most commonly used framework materials. Most studies used air abrasion, salinization, or hydrofluoric acid for surface treatment. Adhesive resin cements were the most frequently used type of cement. The survival rate of In-Ceram ceramics (85.3%-94.8%) was lower than that of In-Ceram zirconia and IPS e.max ZirCAD. Debonding, followed by framework fracture, was the leading cause of failure. Following 3-10 years follow-up, the survival percentage of all-ceramic RBFDPs ranged from 76% to 100%. Although RBFDPs have demonstrated satisfactory success as a conservative treatment, long-term follow-ups and higher sample sizes in clinical research are required to gain more reliable outcomes on the clinical success rate of various RBFDP designs.</p>","PeriodicalId":14985,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Applied Biomaterials & Functional Materials","volume":"22 ","pages":"22808000241250118"},"PeriodicalIF":3.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Applied Biomaterials & Functional Materials","FirstCategoryId":"5","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/22808000241250118","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"BIOPHYSICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Despite the development of implant-supported prostheses, there are still patients for whom conservative treatments such as resin-bonded fixed dental prostheses (RBFDPs) are more appropriate. This study's objective was to analyze the available research on full-ceramic RBFDPs. In this study, Web of Science, MEDLINE/PubMed, Scopus, Embase, Cochrane Library, and Google Scholar databases were searched for articles published in English between 2010 and 2020. A total of 14 studies were reviewed based on the eligibility criteria. The results showed that using a cantilever design with one abutment had an advantage over two abutments. Additionally, it was proposed that preparations designed with retentive aids, such as a proximal box, groove, and pinhole, could improve RBFDP survival rates. IPS e.max ZirCAD, In-Ceram alumina, and zirconia CAD/CAM were the most commonly used framework materials. Most studies used air abrasion, salinization, or hydrofluoric acid for surface treatment. Adhesive resin cements were the most frequently used type of cement. The survival rate of In-Ceram ceramics (85.3%-94.8%) was lower than that of In-Ceram zirconia and IPS e.max ZirCAD. Debonding, followed by framework fracture, was the leading cause of failure. Following 3-10 years follow-up, the survival percentage of all-ceramic RBFDPs ranged from 76% to 100%. Although RBFDPs have demonstrated satisfactory success as a conservative treatment, long-term follow-ups and higher sample sizes in clinical research are required to gain more reliable outcomes on the clinical success rate of various RBFDP designs.

全陶瓷树脂粘结固定义齿:系统综述。
尽管种植体支持义齿已经发展成熟,但仍有一些患者更适合采用树脂粘结固定义齿(RBFDP)等保守治疗方法。本研究的目的是分析关于全瓷 RBFDP 的现有研究。在这项研究中,我们检索了 Web of Science、MEDLINE/PubMed、Scopus、Embase、Cochrane Library 和 Google Scholar 数据库中 2010 年至 2020 年间发表的英文文章。根据资格标准,共审查了 14 项研究。结果显示,使用一个基台的悬臂设计比使用两个基台更有优势。此外,研究还提出,带有固位辅助装置(如近端盒、凹槽和针孔)的基台可以提高 RBFDP 的存活率。IPS e.max ZirCAD、In-Ceram 氧化铝和氧化锆 CAD/CAM 是最常用的框架材料。大多数研究使用气磨、盐渍化或氢氟酸进行表面处理。粘接性树脂水门汀是最常用的水门汀类型。In-Ceram陶瓷的存活率(85.3%-94.8%)低于In-Ceram氧化锆和IPS e.max ZirCAD。脱粘是失败的主要原因,其次是骨架断裂。经过 3-10 年的随访,全陶瓷 RBFDP 的存活率从 76% 到 100% 不等。虽然 RBFDP 作为一种保守治疗方法已经取得了令人满意的效果,但要想获得各种 RBFDP 设计临床成功率的更可靠结果,还需要在临床研究中进行长期随访和增加样本量。
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
Journal of Applied Biomaterials & Functional Materials
Journal of Applied Biomaterials & Functional Materials BIOPHYSICS-ENGINEERING, BIOMEDICAL
CiteScore
4.40
自引率
4.00%
发文量
36
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: The Journal of Applied Biomaterials & Functional Materials (JABFM) is an open access, peer-reviewed, international journal considering the publication of original contributions, reviews and editorials dealing with clinical and laboratory investigations in the fast growing field of biomaterial sciences and functional materials. The areas covered by the journal will include: • Biomaterials / Materials for biomedical applications • Functional materials • Hybrid and composite materials • Soft materials • Hydrogels • Nanomaterials • Gene delivery • Nonodevices • Metamaterials • Active coatings • Surface functionalization • Tissue engineering • Cell delivery/cell encapsulation systems • 3D printing materials • Material characterization • Biomechanics
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信