三种材料用于氧化锆种植体的整体冠:一年的随机临床试验结果。

Marc Balmer, Miha Pirc, Riccardo D Kraus, Nadja Naenni, Daniel S Thoma, Ronald E Jung
{"title":"三种材料用于氧化锆种植体的整体冠:一年的随机临床试验结果。","authors":"Marc Balmer, Miha Pirc, Riccardo D Kraus, Nadja Naenni, Daniel S Thoma, Ronald E Jung","doi":"10.11607/ijp.9455","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>to compare the survival rate, the technical, aesthetic, and biological outcomes of three different materials for monolithic crowns on zirconia implants in a randomized clinical trial.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>a total of 44 patients were randomly divided into three groups and restored with monolithic implant-supported single crowns: zirconia (Zr), polymer- infiltrated ceramic (PIC), and polymer (P). Follow-up evaluations were conducted after one year. Clinical assessments included survival rates, modified United States Public Health Service (USPHS) scores, White Esthetic Scores (WES), plaque index (PI), bleeding on probing (BoP), and probing depth (PD).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>After one year, survival rates for monolithic Zr and PIC crowns were 100%, while the P crown group showed a survival rate of 84.6%. At baseline, the PIC crowns achieved the highest USPHS scores; however, this group also showed a noticeable decline over time. The WES remained stable for the Zr but declined significantly for the other groups due to changes in surface texture. PIC exhibited a significant increase in plaque accumulation.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Regarding the survival rate, no statistically significant differences were observed between the groups. However, a lower survival rate in the P crown group and superior surface stability in the Zr crowns were noted. Within the limitations of the small sample size and short follow-up period, Zr crowns may be recommended for the restoration of one-piece zirconia implants.</p>","PeriodicalId":94232,"journal":{"name":"The International journal of prosthodontics","volume":"0 0","pages":"1-21"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-06-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Three Materials for Monolithic Crowns on Zirconia Implants: One-Year Results of a Randomized Clinical Trial.\",\"authors\":\"Marc Balmer, Miha Pirc, Riccardo D Kraus, Nadja Naenni, Daniel S Thoma, Ronald E Jung\",\"doi\":\"10.11607/ijp.9455\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>to compare the survival rate, the technical, aesthetic, and biological outcomes of three different materials for monolithic crowns on zirconia implants in a randomized clinical trial.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>a total of 44 patients were randomly divided into three groups and restored with monolithic implant-supported single crowns: zirconia (Zr), polymer- infiltrated ceramic (PIC), and polymer (P). Follow-up evaluations were conducted after one year. Clinical assessments included survival rates, modified United States Public Health Service (USPHS) scores, White Esthetic Scores (WES), plaque index (PI), bleeding on probing (BoP), and probing depth (PD).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>After one year, survival rates for monolithic Zr and PIC crowns were 100%, while the P crown group showed a survival rate of 84.6%. At baseline, the PIC crowns achieved the highest USPHS scores; however, this group also showed a noticeable decline over time. The WES remained stable for the Zr but declined significantly for the other groups due to changes in surface texture. PIC exhibited a significant increase in plaque accumulation.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Regarding the survival rate, no statistically significant differences were observed between the groups. However, a lower survival rate in the P crown group and superior surface stability in the Zr crowns were noted. Within the limitations of the small sample size and short follow-up period, Zr crowns may be recommended for the restoration of one-piece zirconia implants.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":94232,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"The International journal of prosthodontics\",\"volume\":\"0 0\",\"pages\":\"1-21\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-06-30\",\"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.9455\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The International journal of prosthodontics","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.11607/ijp.9455","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:在一项随机临床试验中比较三种不同材料的氧化锆种植体整体冠的存活率、技术、美学和生物学结果。材料与方法:将44例患者随机分为三组:氧化锆(Zr)、聚合物浸润陶瓷(PIC)和聚合物(P)。一年后进行随访评估。临床评估包括生存率、改良的美国公共卫生服务(USPHS)评分、白色美学评分(WES)、斑块指数(PI)、探针出血(BoP)和探针深度(PD)。结果:单片Zr和PIC冠组1年后生存率均为100%,P冠组1年后生存率为84.6%。在基线时,PIC冠的USPHS得分最高;然而,随着时间的推移,这组人也表现出明显的下降。Zr组的WES保持稳定,但由于表面纹理的变化,其他组的WES显著下降。PIC表现出斑块积累的显著增加。结论:两组患者生存率差异无统计学意义。然而,P冠组存活率较低,Zr冠的表面稳定性较好。在样本量小、随访时间短的限制下,推荐使用Zr冠修复一体式氧化锆种植体。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Three Materials for Monolithic Crowns on Zirconia Implants: One-Year Results of a Randomized Clinical Trial.

Purpose: to compare the survival rate, the technical, aesthetic, and biological outcomes of three different materials for monolithic crowns on zirconia implants in a randomized clinical trial.

Materials and methods: a total of 44 patients were randomly divided into three groups and restored with monolithic implant-supported single crowns: zirconia (Zr), polymer- infiltrated ceramic (PIC), and polymer (P). Follow-up evaluations were conducted after one year. Clinical assessments included survival rates, modified United States Public Health Service (USPHS) scores, White Esthetic Scores (WES), plaque index (PI), bleeding on probing (BoP), and probing depth (PD).

Results: After one year, survival rates for monolithic Zr and PIC crowns were 100%, while the P crown group showed a survival rate of 84.6%. At baseline, the PIC crowns achieved the highest USPHS scores; however, this group also showed a noticeable decline over time. The WES remained stable for the Zr but declined significantly for the other groups due to changes in surface texture. PIC exhibited a significant increase in plaque accumulation.

Conclusions: Regarding the survival rate, no statistically significant differences were observed between the groups. However, a lower survival rate in the P crown group and superior surface stability in the Zr crowns were noted. Within the limitations of the small sample size and short follow-up period, Zr crowns may be recommended for the restoration of one-piece zirconia 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
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