Prospective Clinical Split-Mouth Study of Two-Wing–Retained Resin-Bonded Anterior Fixed Dental Prostheses with Metallic and Ceramic Frameworks: 5-year Results

IF 2.1 4区 医学 Q2 DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE
Daniel Edelhoff, Anja Liebermann, Oliver Schubert, Jan-Frederik Güth
{"title":"Prospective Clinical Split-Mouth Study of Two-Wing–Retained Resin-Bonded Anterior Fixed Dental Prostheses with Metallic and Ceramic Frameworks: 5-year Results","authors":"Daniel Edelhoff,&nbsp;Anja Liebermann,&nbsp;Oliver Schubert,&nbsp;Jan-Frederik Güth","doi":"10.11607/ijp.7765","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>To analyze the clinical performance of two-wing–retained resin-bonded fixed dental prostheses (RBFDPs) after 5 years of clinical use with respect to technical and biologic complications, as well as survival and success rates.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>RBFDPs were fabricated from 3Y-TZP zirconia layered by hand (Lava Frame veneered with Lava Ceram; 3M ESPE) or metal (Remanium Star, Dentaurum; layered with Reflex, Wieland). The primary endpoints were debonding and fracture. The secondary endpoints (marginal integrity, marginal discoloration, abrasion of antagonist dentition, patient satisfaction, Gingival Index, and side effects) were evaluated at baseline and after 5 years. Survival and success rates were calculated using the Kaplan-Meier method. Log-rank test was used to compare the survival and success rates of the different materials.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The mean observation time was 6 years and 10 months. The estimated cumulative success rate after 5 years was 88.9% ± 10% for metal-supported and 33% ± 16% for all-ceramic two-wing RBFDPs. After conversion into one-wing RBFDPs, the survival rate was 100% in both groups. Debonding of one of the two wings was the major complication. One zirconia framework fracture occurred. Metal-based two-wing RBFDPs showed a significantly higher success rate, but lower esthetic evaluation.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Due to a reduction in technical complication rate and less invasiveness, one-wing RBFDPs should be preferred over two-wing RBFDPs whenever possible.</p>","PeriodicalId":50292,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Prosthodontics","volume":"36 3","pages":"253–261"},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2023-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Prosthodontics","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.11607/ijp.7765","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Purpose: To analyze the clinical performance of two-wing–retained resin-bonded fixed dental prostheses (RBFDPs) after 5 years of clinical use with respect to technical and biologic complications, as well as survival and success rates.

Materials and methods: RBFDPs were fabricated from 3Y-TZP zirconia layered by hand (Lava Frame veneered with Lava Ceram; 3M ESPE) or metal (Remanium Star, Dentaurum; layered with Reflex, Wieland). The primary endpoints were debonding and fracture. The secondary endpoints (marginal integrity, marginal discoloration, abrasion of antagonist dentition, patient satisfaction, Gingival Index, and side effects) were evaluated at baseline and after 5 years. Survival and success rates were calculated using the Kaplan-Meier method. Log-rank test was used to compare the survival and success rates of the different materials.

Results: The mean observation time was 6 years and 10 months. The estimated cumulative success rate after 5 years was 88.9% ± 10% for metal-supported and 33% ± 16% for all-ceramic two-wing RBFDPs. After conversion into one-wing RBFDPs, the survival rate was 100% in both groups. Debonding of one of the two wings was the major complication. One zirconia framework fracture occurred. Metal-based two-wing RBFDPs showed a significantly higher success rate, but lower esthetic evaluation.

Conclusion: Due to a reduction in technical complication rate and less invasiveness, one-wing RBFDPs should be preferred over two-wing RBFDPs whenever possible.

金属和陶瓷框架双翅保留树脂结合前牙固定假体的临床裂口研究:5年的结果
目的:分析双翅保留树脂粘接固定义齿(rbfdp)临床使用5年后的技术、生物学并发症、生存率和成功率。材料与方法:采用手工分层法制备3Y-TZP氧化锆rbfdp(熔岩框架饰以熔岩陶瓷;3M ESPE)或金属(reium Star, Dentaurum;与Reflex, Wieland分层)。主要终点为脱粘和骨折。次要终点(边缘完整性、边缘变色、拮抗牙列磨损、患者满意度、牙龈指数和副作用)在基线和5年后进行评估。生存率和成功率采用Kaplan-Meier法计算。采用Log-rank检验比较不同材料的成活率和成功率。结果:平均观察时间6年10个月。估计5年后的累积成功率,金属支撑的为88.9%±10%,全陶瓷双翼rbfdp为33%±16%。转化为单翼rbfdp后,两组存活率均为100%。其中一个翅膀脱落是主要的并发症。氧化锆框架断裂1例。金属基双翼rbfdp的成功率明显较高,但美学评价较低。结论:由于技术并发症发生率低,侵入性小,在可能的情况下,单翼rbfdp应优于双翼rbfdp。
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
International Journal of Prosthodontics
International Journal of Prosthodontics 医学-牙科与口腔外科
CiteScore
3.20
自引率
4.30%
发文量
82
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: Official Journal of the European Association for Osseointegration (EAO), the International College of Prosthodontists (ICP), the German Society of Prosthodontics and Dental Materials Science (DGPro), and the Italian Academy of Prosthetic Dentistry (AIOP) Prosthodontics demands a clinical research emphasis on patient- and dentist-mediated concerns in the management of oral rehabilitation needs. It is about making and implementing the best clinical decisions to enhance patients'' quality of life via applied biologic architecture - a role that far exceeds that of traditional prosthetic dentistry, with its emphasis on materials and techniques. The International Journal of Prosthodontics is dedicated to exploring and developing this conceptual shift in the role of today''s prosthodontist, clinician, and educator alike. The editorial board is composed of a distinguished team of leading international scholars.
×
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