长达 14 年的临床牙冠延长术和牙冠植入术后牙齿的存活率分析:回顾性队列研究。

IF 4.2 2区 医学 Q1 DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE
Se-Lim Oh, Jiaxin Hu, Kee Hyun Kwak, Man-Kyo Chung
{"title":"长达 14 年的临床牙冠延长术和牙冠植入术后牙齿的存活率分析:回顾性队列研究。","authors":"Se-Lim Oh, Jiaxin Hu, Kee Hyun Kwak, Man-Kyo Chung","doi":"10.1002/JPER.24-0118","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The purpose of this study was to conduct survival analysis of teeth following clinical crown lengthening procedures (CLPs) and crown insertions via a retrospective cohort study.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Patient- and tooth-related data were collected from 268 participants who received CLPs from 2009 to 2015. The Kaplan-Meier curve and the log-rank tests were used to estimate the probability of survival and compare the survival probabilities among different variables. A Cox multivariate proportional hazard regression model was used to investigate the collective effects of root canal treatment (RCT) and the types of opposing dentition.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The rate of tooth loss was 21.6% during the observation period from 1 to 14 years, with 58 teeth extracted. The most attributable reason for tooth extraction was coronal tooth fracture, followed by endodontic failure such as root fracture. The survival probability was 0.87 at 5 years and 0.7 at 10 years. No significant differences in the survival probabilities were found among different providers and locations, the presence of a post, and the types of crowns. The hazard ratio for tooth loss was 6.3, 95% confidence interval (CI) [2.6 to 20.9] in the teeth with RCT (p < 0.001) and 2.4, 95% CI [1.1 to 4.8] in the teeth occluding implant-retained prostheses (p = 0.016).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Tooth loss following CLPs and crown insertions appeared least among the teeth without RCT when occluding natural teeth, while tooth loss was most among the teeth with RCT when occluding implants.</p>","PeriodicalId":16716,"journal":{"name":"Journal of periodontology","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":4.2000,"publicationDate":"2024-06-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Survival analysis of teeth following clinical crown lengthening and crown insertion procedures up to 14 years: A retrospective cohort study.\",\"authors\":\"Se-Lim Oh, Jiaxin Hu, Kee Hyun Kwak, Man-Kyo Chung\",\"doi\":\"10.1002/JPER.24-0118\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The purpose of this study was to conduct survival analysis of teeth following clinical crown lengthening procedures (CLPs) and crown insertions via a retrospective cohort study.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Patient- and tooth-related data were collected from 268 participants who received CLPs from 2009 to 2015. The Kaplan-Meier curve and the log-rank tests were used to estimate the probability of survival and compare the survival probabilities among different variables. A Cox multivariate proportional hazard regression model was used to investigate the collective effects of root canal treatment (RCT) and the types of opposing dentition.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The rate of tooth loss was 21.6% during the observation period from 1 to 14 years, with 58 teeth extracted. The most attributable reason for tooth extraction was coronal tooth fracture, followed by endodontic failure such as root fracture. The survival probability was 0.87 at 5 years and 0.7 at 10 years. No significant differences in the survival probabilities were found among different providers and locations, the presence of a post, and the types of crowns. The hazard ratio for tooth loss was 6.3, 95% confidence interval (CI) [2.6 to 20.9] in the teeth with RCT (p < 0.001) and 2.4, 95% CI [1.1 to 4.8] in the teeth occluding implant-retained prostheses (p = 0.016).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Tooth loss following CLPs and crown insertions appeared least among the teeth without RCT when occluding natural teeth, while tooth loss was most among the teeth with RCT when occluding implants.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":16716,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of periodontology\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-06-14\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of periodontology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1002/JPER.24-0118\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"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":"Journal of periodontology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1002/JPER.24-0118","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:本研究旨在通过回顾性队列研究对临床牙冠延长术(CLP)和牙冠植入术后的牙齿进行存活率分析:本研究旨在通过一项回顾性队列研究,对临床牙冠延长术(CLP)和牙冠植入术后的牙齿进行存活率分析:方法: 收集了 2009 年至 2015 年期间接受临床牙冠延长术的 268 名参与者的患者和牙齿相关数据。采用卡普兰-梅耶曲线和对数秩检验估算生存概率,并比较不同变量之间的生存概率。采用 Cox 多变量比例危险回归模型来研究根管治疗(RCT)和对牙类型的共同影响:结果:在1至14年的观察期内,牙齿脱落率为21.6%,共拔除58颗牙齿。最常见的拔牙原因是牙冠折断,其次是牙髓治疗失败,如牙根折断。5 年的存活概率为 0.87,10 年的存活概率为 0.7。不同的医疗机构和地点、是否存在牙柱以及牙冠类型在存活概率上没有明显差异。在使用 RCT 的牙齿中,牙齿脱落的危险比为 6.3,95% 置信区间 (CI) [2.6 至 20.9](p 结论:在使用 RCT 的牙齿中,牙齿脱落的危险比为 6.3,95% 置信区间 (CI) [2.6 至 20.9]:在咬合天然牙时,无 RCT 的牙齿在植入 CLP 和牙冠后的牙齿缺失最少,而在咬合种植体时,有 RCT 的牙齿缺失最多。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Survival analysis of teeth following clinical crown lengthening and crown insertion procedures up to 14 years: A retrospective cohort study.

Background: The purpose of this study was to conduct survival analysis of teeth following clinical crown lengthening procedures (CLPs) and crown insertions via a retrospective cohort study.

Methods: Patient- and tooth-related data were collected from 268 participants who received CLPs from 2009 to 2015. The Kaplan-Meier curve and the log-rank tests were used to estimate the probability of survival and compare the survival probabilities among different variables. A Cox multivariate proportional hazard regression model was used to investigate the collective effects of root canal treatment (RCT) and the types of opposing dentition.

Results: The rate of tooth loss was 21.6% during the observation period from 1 to 14 years, with 58 teeth extracted. The most attributable reason for tooth extraction was coronal tooth fracture, followed by endodontic failure such as root fracture. The survival probability was 0.87 at 5 years and 0.7 at 10 years. No significant differences in the survival probabilities were found among different providers and locations, the presence of a post, and the types of crowns. The hazard ratio for tooth loss was 6.3, 95% confidence interval (CI) [2.6 to 20.9] in the teeth with RCT (p < 0.001) and 2.4, 95% CI [1.1 to 4.8] in the teeth occluding implant-retained prostheses (p = 0.016).

Conclusions: Tooth loss following CLPs and crown insertions appeared least among the teeth without RCT when occluding natural teeth, while tooth loss was most among the teeth with RCT when occluding implants.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of periodontology
Journal of periodontology 医学-牙科与口腔外科
CiteScore
9.10
自引率
7.00%
发文量
290
审稿时长
3-8 weeks
期刊介绍: The Journal of Periodontology publishes articles relevant to the science and practice of periodontics and related areas.
×
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