File Download

There are no files associated with this item.

Supplementary

Conference Paper: RCT Comparing Molar Two- and Three-unit RBBs- Preliminary Findings

TitleRCT Comparing Molar Two- and Three-unit RBBs- Preliminary Findings
Authors
Issue Date2017
PublisherInternational Association for Dental Research. The Journal's web site is located at http://www.iadr.org/
Citation
The 95th General Session and Exhibition of the International Association for Dental Research (IADR) held with the 46th Annual Meeting of the American Association for Dental Research (AADR) and the 41st Annual Meeting of the Canadian Association for Dental Research (CADR), San Francisco, CA., 22-25 March 2017.In Journal of Dental Research (Spec Issue), 2017, v. 96 n. Spec Iss A How to Cite?
AbstractObjectives: Resin-bonded bridges (RBBs) are a conservative prosthesis adhesively bonded to abutment teeth with minimal tooth preparation. Since its development in the 1970’s, RBB has had improved clinical success based on improved adhesive cements, biomechanical principles and the use of two-unit cantilevered (CL2) design. While the CL2 RBBs have been shown to be more successful than fixed-fixed design, they have not been recommended for molar-sized edentulous span due to Ante’s law. The aim of this study is to report the preliminary findings of a randomized controlled trial (RCT) comparing three-unit fixed-movable (FM3) and CL2 RBBs for molar-sized spans (8-10 mm). Methods: The protocol was registered with Clinicaltrial.gov (NCT02239718) and ethics approval obtained (UW 14-233). Patients with at least one missing molar and that fulfilled the inclusion/extrusion criteria were recruited and randomized (ratio 1:1) into CL2 (test) and FM3 (control) group. Patients were examined before and at 1, 6, 12 months after insertion of RBBs by independent assessors. Abutment teeth mobility and tightness of proximal contacts were recorded by periotest and digital gauge respectively. Patients satisfaction was recorded by visual analogue scale after insertion of RBBs. Results: Fifty-eight patients were enrolled and seventy-nine RBBs were inserted with forty-one CL2 and 38 FM3 RBBs. Thirty-seven patients attended at one-month review, 17 at 6-months and 4 at 12-months review. The vast majority these prostheses were provided by undergraduate dental students. One CL2 and one FM3 RBBs was debonded resulting in retention rate of 97.6 and 97.4%. Both RBBs were rebonded. The presence of proximal contacts inferred no abutment tooth drifted. Patients were generally satisfactory to both design. No adverse outcomes were reported. Conclusions: These preliminary findings show that CL2 RBBs can be successfully placed for molar spans with no observable drifting. Longer term and more comprehensive data will be collected.
DescriptionOral Session: Clinical Investigations in Prosthodontics - Presentation no. 0432
Persistent Identifierhttp://hdl.handle.net/10722/243904

 

DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorBotelho, MG-
dc.contributor.authorLam, YHW-
dc.contributor.authorLo, ECM-
dc.date.accessioned2017-08-25T03:01:02Z-
dc.date.available2017-08-25T03:01:02Z-
dc.date.issued2017-
dc.identifier.citationThe 95th General Session and Exhibition of the International Association for Dental Research (IADR) held with the 46th Annual Meeting of the American Association for Dental Research (AADR) and the 41st Annual Meeting of the Canadian Association for Dental Research (CADR), San Francisco, CA., 22-25 March 2017.In Journal of Dental Research (Spec Issue), 2017, v. 96 n. Spec Iss A-
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10722/243904-
dc.descriptionOral Session: Clinical Investigations in Prosthodontics - Presentation no. 0432-
dc.description.abstractObjectives: Resin-bonded bridges (RBBs) are a conservative prosthesis adhesively bonded to abutment teeth with minimal tooth preparation. Since its development in the 1970’s, RBB has had improved clinical success based on improved adhesive cements, biomechanical principles and the use of two-unit cantilevered (CL2) design. While the CL2 RBBs have been shown to be more successful than fixed-fixed design, they have not been recommended for molar-sized edentulous span due to Ante’s law. The aim of this study is to report the preliminary findings of a randomized controlled trial (RCT) comparing three-unit fixed-movable (FM3) and CL2 RBBs for molar-sized spans (8-10 mm). Methods: The protocol was registered with Clinicaltrial.gov (NCT02239718) and ethics approval obtained (UW 14-233). Patients with at least one missing molar and that fulfilled the inclusion/extrusion criteria were recruited and randomized (ratio 1:1) into CL2 (test) and FM3 (control) group. Patients were examined before and at 1, 6, 12 months after insertion of RBBs by independent assessors. Abutment teeth mobility and tightness of proximal contacts were recorded by periotest and digital gauge respectively. Patients satisfaction was recorded by visual analogue scale after insertion of RBBs. Results: Fifty-eight patients were enrolled and seventy-nine RBBs were inserted with forty-one CL2 and 38 FM3 RBBs. Thirty-seven patients attended at one-month review, 17 at 6-months and 4 at 12-months review. The vast majority these prostheses were provided by undergraduate dental students. One CL2 and one FM3 RBBs was debonded resulting in retention rate of 97.6 and 97.4%. Both RBBs were rebonded. The presence of proximal contacts inferred no abutment tooth drifted. Patients were generally satisfactory to both design. No adverse outcomes were reported. Conclusions: These preliminary findings show that CL2 RBBs can be successfully placed for molar spans with no observable drifting. Longer term and more comprehensive data will be collected.-
dc.languageeng-
dc.publisherInternational Association for Dental Research. The Journal's web site is located at http://www.iadr.org/-
dc.relation.ispartofJournal of Dental Research (Spec Issue)-
dc.titleRCT Comparing Molar Two- and Three-unit RBBs- Preliminary Findings-
dc.typeConference_Paper-
dc.identifier.emailBotelho, MG: botelho@hkucc.hku.hk-
dc.identifier.emailLam, YHW: retlaw@hku.hk-
dc.identifier.emailLo, ECM: edward-lo@hku.hk-
dc.identifier.authorityBotelho, MG=rp00033-
dc.identifier.authorityLam, YHW=rp02183-
dc.identifier.authorityLo, ECM=rp00015-
dc.identifier.hkuros274333-
dc.identifier.volume96-
dc.identifier.issueSpec Iss A-
dc.publisher.placeUnited States-

Export via OAI-PMH Interface in XML Formats


OR


Export to Other Non-XML Formats