{"title":"下颌前部悬臂延伸种植体支撑固定义齿的临床和放射学效果：回顾性研究。","authors":"Siyuan Wang, Xiaoyu Chen, Zhaoting Ling, Yiwen Xie, Cong Chen, Xiaoting Shen, Fuming He","doi":"10.1111/clr.14310","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Objectives</h3>\n \n <p>The objective of this study is to analyze the clinical and radiographic outcomes of implant-supported fixed protheses with cantilever extensions (ISFPCs) in the partially edentulous anterior mandible.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Materials and Methods</h3>\n \n <p>Patients who received anterior mandible implant restoration between January 2016 and December 2021 were included. Patients with two, three, or four continuous missing teeth receiving adjacent implant supported single-unit crowns (ISSCs), ISFPCs, implant-supported fixed protheses without cantilever extensions (ISFPNs) were divided into groups: ISSC+ISSC, ISFPC, ISSC+ISFPC, three-unit ISFPN, ISFPC+ISFPC, or four-unit ISFPN, respectively. We recorded and evaluated survival rates, mechanical and biological complications, peri-implant marginal bone loss (MBL), esthetic outcomes, and patient perceptions. Statistical analysis was performed using linear mixed models (LMM).</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Results</h3>\n \n <p>The study included 87 patients and 152 implants. No implant loss occurred during an average follow-up of 3.48 ± 1.85 years (range: 1–7 years). According to LMM models, prosthetic type had a statistically significant impact on MBL during follow-up periods, in favor of the ISFPC and ISFPC+ISFPC groups (0.16 ± 0.48 mm vs. 0.51 ± 0.49 mm, <i>p</i> = .034; 0.22 ± 0.49 mm vs. 0.60 ± 0.62 mm, <i>p</i> = .043, respectively). Mechanical and biological complications were relatively low and comparable. The four-unit ISFPC group had higher subjective esthetic scores compared with the ISSC+ISSC group (98.6 vs. 83.8, <i>p</i> < .05), and patients in the ISFPC+ISFPC group expressed greater satisfaction with cleanability than the ISFPN group (98.8 vs. 80.6).</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Conclusion</h3>\n \n <p>ISFPCs offer a highly predictable treatment option in the anterior mandible, characterized by high survival rates, and comparable complication rates, peri-implant bone stability and esthetics to adjacent ISSCs or ISFPNs.</p>\n </section>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":10455,"journal":{"name":"Clinical Oral Implants Research","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":4.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-06-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Clinical and radiographic outcomes of implant-supported fixed prostheses with cantilever extension in anterior mandible: A retrospective study\",\"authors\":\"Siyuan Wang, Xiaoyu Chen, Zhaoting Ling, Yiwen Xie, Cong Chen, Xiaoting Shen, Fuming He\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/clr.14310\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div>\\n \\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Objectives</h3>\\n \\n <p>The objective of this study is to analyze the clinical and radiographic outcomes of implant-supported fixed protheses with cantilever extensions (ISFPCs) in the partially edentulous anterior mandible.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Materials and Methods</h3>\\n \\n <p>Patients who received anterior mandible implant restoration between January 2016 and December 2021 were included. Patients with two, three, or four continuous missing teeth receiving adjacent implant supported single-unit crowns (ISSCs), ISFPCs, implant-supported fixed protheses without cantilever extensions (ISFPNs) were divided into groups: ISSC+ISSC, ISFPC, ISSC+ISFPC, three-unit ISFPN, ISFPC+ISFPC, or four-unit ISFPN, respectively. We recorded and evaluated survival rates, mechanical and biological complications, peri-implant marginal bone loss (MBL), esthetic outcomes, and patient perceptions. Statistical analysis was performed using linear mixed models (LMM).</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Results</h3>\\n \\n <p>The study included 87 patients and 152 implants. No implant loss occurred during an average follow-up of 3.48 ± 1.85 years (range: 1–7 years). According to LMM models, prosthetic type had a statistically significant impact on MBL during follow-up periods, in favor of the ISFPC and ISFPC+ISFPC groups (0.16 ± 0.48 mm vs. 0.51 ± 0.49 mm, <i>p</i> = .034; 0.22 ± 0.49 mm vs. 0.60 ± 0.62 mm, <i>p</i> = .043, respectively). Mechanical and biological complications were relatively low and comparable. The four-unit ISFPC group had higher subjective esthetic scores compared with the ISSC+ISSC group (98.6 vs. 83.8, <i>p</i> < .05), and patients in the ISFPC+ISFPC group expressed greater satisfaction with cleanability than the ISFPN group (98.8 vs. 80.6).</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Conclusion</h3>\\n \\n <p>ISFPCs offer a highly predictable treatment option in the anterior mandible, characterized by high survival rates, and comparable complication rates, peri-implant bone stability and esthetics to adjacent ISSCs or ISFPNs.</p>\\n </section>\\n </div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":10455,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Clinical Oral Implants Research\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-06-11\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Clinical Oral Implants Research\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"5\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/clr.14310\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Clinical Oral Implants Research","FirstCategoryId":"5","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/clr.14310","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
Clinical and radiographic outcomes of implant-supported fixed prostheses with cantilever extension in anterior mandible: A retrospective study
Objectives
The objective of this study is to analyze the clinical and radiographic outcomes of implant-supported fixed protheses with cantilever extensions (ISFPCs) in the partially edentulous anterior mandible.
Materials and Methods
Patients who received anterior mandible implant restoration between January 2016 and December 2021 were included. Patients with two, three, or four continuous missing teeth receiving adjacent implant supported single-unit crowns (ISSCs), ISFPCs, implant-supported fixed protheses without cantilever extensions (ISFPNs) were divided into groups: ISSC+ISSC, ISFPC, ISSC+ISFPC, three-unit ISFPN, ISFPC+ISFPC, or four-unit ISFPN, respectively. We recorded and evaluated survival rates, mechanical and biological complications, peri-implant marginal bone loss (MBL), esthetic outcomes, and patient perceptions. Statistical analysis was performed using linear mixed models (LMM).
Results
The study included 87 patients and 152 implants. No implant loss occurred during an average follow-up of 3.48 ± 1.85 years (range: 1–7 years). According to LMM models, prosthetic type had a statistically significant impact on MBL during follow-up periods, in favor of the ISFPC and ISFPC+ISFPC groups (0.16 ± 0.48 mm vs. 0.51 ± 0.49 mm, p = .034; 0.22 ± 0.49 mm vs. 0.60 ± 0.62 mm, p = .043, respectively). Mechanical and biological complications were relatively low and comparable. The four-unit ISFPC group had higher subjective esthetic scores compared with the ISSC+ISSC group (98.6 vs. 83.8, p < .05), and patients in the ISFPC+ISFPC group expressed greater satisfaction with cleanability than the ISFPN group (98.8 vs. 80.6).
Conclusion
ISFPCs offer a highly predictable treatment option in the anterior mandible, characterized by high survival rates, and comparable complication rates, peri-implant bone stability and esthetics to adjacent ISSCs or ISFPNs.
期刊介绍：
Clinical Oral Implants Research conveys scientific progress in the field of implant dentistry and its related areas to clinicians, teachers and researchers concerned with the application of this information for the benefit of patients in need of oral implants. The journal addresses itself to clinicians, general practitioners, periodontists, oral and maxillofacial surgeons and prosthodontists, as well as to teachers, academicians and scholars involved in the education of professionals and in the scientific promotion of the field of implant dentistry.
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
京公网安备 11010802042870号
