Barbara Sobczak, Piotr Majewski, Evgenii Egorenkov
{"title":"三维打印与研磨即刻临时全口修复体的存活率和成功率：回顾性分析","authors":"Barbara Sobczak, Piotr Majewski, Evgenii Egorenkov","doi":"10.1111/cid.13418","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Objective</h3>\n \n <p>To evaluate and compare the survival rates of 3D-printed and chairside milled resin polymethylmethacrylate (PMMA) immediate temporary provisional full-arch implant restorations using prosthetic survival as the primary outcome.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Materials and Methods</h3>\n \n <p>Records of 335 routine patients receiving 443 temporary six-implant retained maxillary or mandibular prosthetic restorations between January 2019 and January 2022 at a private clinic (Dr Sobczak Clinical Centre, Radosc, Poland) were considered for this retrospective analysis. The analysis compared prosthetic and implant failure rates between printed and milled restorations as primary and secondary outcomes, respectively. Patient-related and treatment-related characteristics between groups were compared using the Chi-square test and Mann–Whitney U-test, respectively. Group-specific cumulative prosthetic survival was qualitatively and quantitively compared using Kaplan–Meier, generalized linear mixed models and univariate cox proportional hazard analyses. Prosthetic survival was set into context to implant survival using Chi-square tests. A multivariable cox proportional hazards model with frailty was used to identify confounding factors affecting prosthetic survival.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Results</h3>\n \n <p>Prosthetic failure rates of milled and printed temporary restorations were 13.01% and 11.25% over the average follow-up period of 307.7 ± 115.5 days, respectively. The corresponding 180-day cumulative prosthetic survival rates were 92.4% and 93%. Hazard ratios for the prosthetic failure of milled and printed restorations did not show a statistical difference (<i>p</i> = 0.794). Implant failure rates in restorations that experienced prosthetic failure (17.31%) were higher compared to restorations without failures (5.63%), with a 3.2 times significantly higher odds of failure for a prosthesis experiencing implant loss (<i>p</i> = 0.003). Gender, presence of teeth at treatment baseline, smoking, and bone augmentation were identified as confounding factors impacting prosthetic survival.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Conclusion</h3>\n \n <p>Chairside 3D-printed restorations may represent an equivalent treatment modality to established chairside milled restorations for immediate full-arch therapy. Provisional prosthetic survival may impact implant survival and treatment success.</p>\n </section>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":50679,"journal":{"name":"Clinical Implant Dentistry and Related Research","volume":"27 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Survival and Success of 3D-Printed Versus Milled Immediate Provisional Full-Arch Restorations: A Retrospective Analysis\",\"authors\":\"Barbara Sobczak, Piotr Majewski, Evgenii Egorenkov\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/cid.13418\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div>\\n \\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Objective</h3>\\n \\n <p>To evaluate and compare the survival rates of 3D-printed and chairside milled resin polymethylmethacrylate (PMMA) immediate temporary provisional full-arch implant restorations using prosthetic survival as the primary outcome.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Materials and Methods</h3>\\n \\n <p>Records of 335 routine patients receiving 443 temporary six-implant retained maxillary or mandibular prosthetic restorations between January 2019 and January 2022 at a private clinic (Dr Sobczak Clinical Centre, Radosc, Poland) were considered for this retrospective analysis. The analysis compared prosthetic and implant failure rates between printed and milled restorations as primary and secondary outcomes, respectively. Patient-related and treatment-related characteristics between groups were compared using the Chi-square test and Mann–Whitney U-test, respectively. Group-specific cumulative prosthetic survival was qualitatively and quantitively compared using Kaplan–Meier, generalized linear mixed models and univariate cox proportional hazard analyses. Prosthetic survival was set into context to implant survival using Chi-square tests. A multivariable cox proportional hazards model with frailty was used to identify confounding factors affecting prosthetic survival.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Results</h3>\\n \\n <p>Prosthetic failure rates of milled and printed temporary restorations were 13.01% and 11.25% over the average follow-up period of 307.7 ± 115.5 days, respectively. The corresponding 180-day cumulative prosthetic survival rates were 92.4% and 93%. Hazard ratios for the prosthetic failure of milled and printed restorations did not show a statistical difference (<i>p</i> = 0.794). Implant failure rates in restorations that experienced prosthetic failure (17.31%) were higher compared to restorations without failures (5.63%), with a 3.2 times significantly higher odds of failure for a prosthesis experiencing implant loss (<i>p</i> = 0.003). Gender, presence of teeth at treatment baseline, smoking, and bone augmentation were identified as confounding factors impacting prosthetic survival.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Conclusion</h3>\\n \\n <p>Chairside 3D-printed restorations may represent an equivalent treatment modality to established chairside milled restorations for immediate full-arch therapy. Provisional prosthetic survival may impact implant survival and treatment success.</p>\\n </section>\\n </div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":50679,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Clinical Implant Dentistry and Related Research\",\"volume\":\"27 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-11-26\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Clinical Implant Dentistry and Related Research\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/cid.13418\",\"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":"Clinical Implant Dentistry and Related Research","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/cid.13418","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}
Survival and Success of 3D-Printed Versus Milled Immediate Provisional Full-Arch Restorations: A Retrospective Analysis
Objective
To evaluate and compare the survival rates of 3D-printed and chairside milled resin polymethylmethacrylate (PMMA) immediate temporary provisional full-arch implant restorations using prosthetic survival as the primary outcome.
Materials and Methods
Records of 335 routine patients receiving 443 temporary six-implant retained maxillary or mandibular prosthetic restorations between January 2019 and January 2022 at a private clinic (Dr Sobczak Clinical Centre, Radosc, Poland) were considered for this retrospective analysis. The analysis compared prosthetic and implant failure rates between printed and milled restorations as primary and secondary outcomes, respectively. Patient-related and treatment-related characteristics between groups were compared using the Chi-square test and Mann–Whitney U-test, respectively. Group-specific cumulative prosthetic survival was qualitatively and quantitively compared using Kaplan–Meier, generalized linear mixed models and univariate cox proportional hazard analyses. Prosthetic survival was set into context to implant survival using Chi-square tests. A multivariable cox proportional hazards model with frailty was used to identify confounding factors affecting prosthetic survival.
Results
Prosthetic failure rates of milled and printed temporary restorations were 13.01% and 11.25% over the average follow-up period of 307.7 ± 115.5 days, respectively. The corresponding 180-day cumulative prosthetic survival rates were 92.4% and 93%. Hazard ratios for the prosthetic failure of milled and printed restorations did not show a statistical difference (p = 0.794). Implant failure rates in restorations that experienced prosthetic failure (17.31%) were higher compared to restorations without failures (5.63%), with a 3.2 times significantly higher odds of failure for a prosthesis experiencing implant loss (p = 0.003). Gender, presence of teeth at treatment baseline, smoking, and bone augmentation were identified as confounding factors impacting prosthetic survival.
Conclusion
Chairside 3D-printed restorations may represent an equivalent treatment modality to established chairside milled restorations for immediate full-arch therapy. Provisional prosthetic survival may impact implant survival and treatment success.
期刊介绍：
The goal of Clinical Implant Dentistry and Related Research is to advance the scientific and technical aspects relating to dental implants and related scientific subjects. Dissemination of new and evolving information related to dental implants and the related science is the primary goal of our journal.
The range of topics covered by the journals will include but be not limited to:
New scientific developments relating to bone
Implant surfaces and their relationship to the surrounding tissues
Computer aided implant designs
Computer aided prosthetic designs
Immediate implant loading
Immediate implant placement
Materials relating to bone induction and conduction
New surgical methods relating to implant placement
New materials and methods relating to implant restorations
Methods for determining implant stability
A primary focus of the journal is publication of evidenced based articles evaluating to new dental implants, techniques and multicenter studies evaluating these treatments. In addition basic science research relating to wound healing and osseointegration will be an important focus for the journal.
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
京公网安备 11010802042870号
