A Retrospective Clinical Multicenter Study of Single Retainer Glass-Ceramic Resin Bonded Fixed Dental Prostheses and Implant-Supported Single Crowns in the Esthetic Zone.

IF 1.8
Zahra Athab Abdulijabbar, Alf Eliasson, Victoria Franke Stenport, Lars Hjalmarsson
{"title":"A Retrospective Clinical Multicenter Study of Single Retainer Glass-Ceramic Resin Bonded Fixed Dental Prostheses and Implant-Supported Single Crowns in the Esthetic Zone.","authors":"Zahra Athab Abdulijabbar, Alf Eliasson, Victoria Franke Stenport, Lars Hjalmarsson","doi":"10.11607/ijp.9427","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>To evaluate and compare the 3-8-year survival, complication, esthetics, and patient- reported outcomes of single retainer glass-ceramic resin bonded fixed dental prostheses (RBFDPs), and implant supported single crowns (ISSCs).</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>A retrospective multicenter study including 48 participants with 66 single retainer lithium disilicate RBFDPs and 45 participants with 53 ISSCs in the anterior or premolar position. A clinical and radiographical examination including esthetic evaluation using White and Pink Esthetic Score index (PES and WES) were performed. Participants completed the Oral Health Impact Profile questionnaire (OHIP-14) and a visual analogue scale VAS, to evaluate subjective treatment outcomes.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The mean follow up was 50 months for RBFDPs and 73 months for ISSCs. There was a statistically significant difference in 5-year survival rates for RBFDPs 87.9% and ISSCs 96.7% and 100% for implants (P=.012). There was also a statistically significant difference in survival rates for RBFDPs between the clinics (P = .015). The RBFDP group had 15% technical complications (one debonding and nine fatal fractures), and the ISSCs had 11.3% technical (four extensive and two minor ceramic fractures) and 5.6% biological complications. The WES evaluation was statistically significantly better for RBFDPs than for the ISSCs (P=.002) but, no statistical difference was present in PES evaluation (P=.47). All participants were satisfied according to OHIP-14 and VAS except for two with ISSCs.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>ISSCs had a higher survival rate than the RBFDPs, however a correctly designed single retainer glass-ceramic lithium disilicate RBFDP is a viable treatment when ISSC is not indicated.</p>","PeriodicalId":94232,"journal":{"name":"The International journal of prosthodontics","volume":"0 0","pages":"1-26"},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2025-07-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The International journal of prosthodontics","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.11607/ijp.9427","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Purpose: To evaluate and compare the 3-8-year survival, complication, esthetics, and patient- reported outcomes of single retainer glass-ceramic resin bonded fixed dental prostheses (RBFDPs), and implant supported single crowns (ISSCs).

Materials and methods: A retrospective multicenter study including 48 participants with 66 single retainer lithium disilicate RBFDPs and 45 participants with 53 ISSCs in the anterior or premolar position. A clinical and radiographical examination including esthetic evaluation using White and Pink Esthetic Score index (PES and WES) were performed. Participants completed the Oral Health Impact Profile questionnaire (OHIP-14) and a visual analogue scale VAS, to evaluate subjective treatment outcomes.

Results: The mean follow up was 50 months for RBFDPs and 73 months for ISSCs. There was a statistically significant difference in 5-year survival rates for RBFDPs 87.9% and ISSCs 96.7% and 100% for implants (P=.012). There was also a statistically significant difference in survival rates for RBFDPs between the clinics (P = .015). The RBFDP group had 15% technical complications (one debonding and nine fatal fractures), and the ISSCs had 11.3% technical (four extensive and two minor ceramic fractures) and 5.6% biological complications. The WES evaluation was statistically significantly better for RBFDPs than for the ISSCs (P=.002) but, no statistical difference was present in PES evaluation (P=.47). All participants were satisfied according to OHIP-14 and VAS except for two with ISSCs.

Conclusions: ISSCs had a higher survival rate than the RBFDPs, however a correctly designed single retainer glass-ceramic lithium disilicate RBFDP is a viable treatment when ISSC is not indicated.

单固位玻璃陶瓷树脂粘接固定义齿与种植体支撑单冠在美观区的回顾性临床多中心研究。
目的:评价和比较单固位玻璃陶瓷树脂粘接固定义齿(rbfdp)和种植体支撑单冠(ISSCs) 3-8年的生存率、并发症、美观性和患者报告的结果。材料和方法:一项回顾性多中心研究,包括48名参与者,66个单固位二硅酸锂rbfdp和45名参与者,53个ISSCs在前磨牙或前磨牙位置。进行临床和影像学检查,包括使用白色和粉红色审美评分指数(PES和WES)进行审美评价。参与者完成了口腔健康影响问卷(OHIP-14)和视觉模拟VAS量表,以评估主观治疗结果。结果:rbfdp患者平均随访50个月,ISSCs患者平均随访73个月。rbfdp组的5年生存率为87.9%,ISSCs组为96.7%,种植体组为100%,差异有统计学意义(P= 0.012)。两家诊所之间rbfdp的生存率也有统计学意义差异(P = 0.015)。RBFDP组有15%的技术性并发症(1例脱粘和9例致命骨折),ISSCs有11.3%的技术性并发症(4例广泛骨折和2例轻微陶瓷骨折)和5.6%的生物学并发症。rbfdp的WES评分显著优于ISSCs (P= 0.002), PES评分差异无统计学意义(P= 0.47)。除2例ISSCs患者外,所有患者均满意OHIP-14和VAS评分。结论:ISSCs的存活率高于RBFDP,然而,当不需要ISSC时,设计正确的单固位玻璃陶瓷二硅酸锂RBFDP是一种可行的治疗方法。
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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信