File Download

There are no files associated with this item.

  Links for fulltext
     (May Require Subscription)
Supplementary

Article: Longevity of implant crowns and 2-unit cantilevered resin-bonded bridges

TitleLongevity of implant crowns and 2-unit cantilevered resin-bonded bridges
Authors
KeywordsBounded edentulous space
Biological complications
Fixed dental prostheses
Technical complications
Complication rates
Peri-implantitis
Failures
Debonding
Dental implants
Single crowns
Success
Survival
Resin-bonded bridges
Issue Date2013
Citation
Clinical Oral Implants Research, 2013, v. 24, n. 12, p. 1369-1374 How to Cite?
AbstractObjective: To compare "survival" and "success" of implant-supported crowns (ISC) and tooth-supported 2-unit cantilevered resin-bonded bridges (cRBB) in the rehabilitation of a bounded single tooth space (BSTS), after an observation period of ≥5 years. Methods: A case-control study among subjects who received ISC or cRBB rehabilitation at a teaching hospital. The (i) survival (retention in mouth) and (ii) success (absence of complications requiring intervention) for the ISCs and cRBBs were compared (overall, supporting structures and that of the prostheses). Rates of survival and success were compared using log-rank statistics. Prevalence of survival and success (categories) were compared by chi-square/Fisher's exact test. Results: Seventy eight subjects participated in this study (39 ISC and 39 cRBB cases). Both had a mean observation time exceeding 100 months, P > 0.05. ISCs and cRBBs had similar survival rates: overall (P = 0.96), supporting structures (P = 0.14) and prostheses (P = 0.44) There was a significant difference in the rate of overall success between ISCs and cRBBs (P = 0.03), specifically with respect to the success rate of the supporting structures (P = 0.03). There was also a significant difference in the prevalence of supporting structures categorized as a "success": ISCs (69.2%) and cRBBs (89.7%), P = 0.03. Biological complications of supporting structures were more common among ISCs (25.6%) compared with cRBBs (7.7%), P = 0.03. Conclusion: Implant-supported crowns and cRBBs in the rehabilitation of a BSTS survive similarly after at least 5 years. However, cRBBs had a higher success rate and were more frequently categorized as successful than ISCs. Notably, there were fewer biological complications of cRBBs supporting structures than ISCs. © 2012 John Wiley & Sons A/S.
Persistent Identifierhttp://hdl.handle.net/10722/230939
ISSN
2015 Impact Factor: 3.464
2015 SCImago Journal Rankings: 1.427

 

DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorLam, Walter Y H-
dc.contributor.authorBotelho, Michael G.-
dc.contributor.authorMcgrath, Colman P J-
dc.date.accessioned2016-09-01T06:07:12Z-
dc.date.available2016-09-01T06:07:12Z-
dc.date.issued2013-
dc.identifier.citationClinical Oral Implants Research, 2013, v. 24, n. 12, p. 1369-1374-
dc.identifier.issn0905-7161-
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10722/230939-
dc.description.abstractObjective: To compare "survival" and "success" of implant-supported crowns (ISC) and tooth-supported 2-unit cantilevered resin-bonded bridges (cRBB) in the rehabilitation of a bounded single tooth space (BSTS), after an observation period of ≥5 years. Methods: A case-control study among subjects who received ISC or cRBB rehabilitation at a teaching hospital. The (i) survival (retention in mouth) and (ii) success (absence of complications requiring intervention) for the ISCs and cRBBs were compared (overall, supporting structures and that of the prostheses). Rates of survival and success were compared using log-rank statistics. Prevalence of survival and success (categories) were compared by chi-square/Fisher's exact test. Results: Seventy eight subjects participated in this study (39 ISC and 39 cRBB cases). Both had a mean observation time exceeding 100 months, P > 0.05. ISCs and cRBBs had similar survival rates: overall (P = 0.96), supporting structures (P = 0.14) and prostheses (P = 0.44) There was a significant difference in the rate of overall success between ISCs and cRBBs (P = 0.03), specifically with respect to the success rate of the supporting structures (P = 0.03). There was also a significant difference in the prevalence of supporting structures categorized as a "success": ISCs (69.2%) and cRBBs (89.7%), P = 0.03. Biological complications of supporting structures were more common among ISCs (25.6%) compared with cRBBs (7.7%), P = 0.03. Conclusion: Implant-supported crowns and cRBBs in the rehabilitation of a BSTS survive similarly after at least 5 years. However, cRBBs had a higher success rate and were more frequently categorized as successful than ISCs. Notably, there were fewer biological complications of cRBBs supporting structures than ISCs. © 2012 John Wiley & Sons A/S.-
dc.languageeng-
dc.relation.ispartofClinical Oral Implants Research-
dc.subjectBounded edentulous space-
dc.subjectBiological complications-
dc.subjectFixed dental prostheses-
dc.subjectTechnical complications-
dc.subjectComplication rates-
dc.subjectPeri-implantitis-
dc.subjectFailures-
dc.subjectDebonding-
dc.subjectDental implants-
dc.subjectSingle crowns-
dc.subjectSuccess-
dc.subjectSurvival-
dc.subjectResin-bonded bridges-
dc.titleLongevity of implant crowns and 2-unit cantilevered resin-bonded bridges-
dc.typeArticle-
dc.description.natureLink_to_subscribed_fulltext-
dc.identifier.doi10.1111/clr.12034-
dc.identifier.pmid23025467-
dc.identifier.scopuseid_2-s2.0-84886751021-
dc.identifier.volume24-
dc.identifier.issue12-
dc.identifier.spage1369-
dc.identifier.epage1374-
dc.identifier.eissn1600-0501-

Export via OAI-PMH Interface in XML Formats


OR


Export to Other Non-XML Formats