Electroplated and cast double crown-retained removable dental prostheses: 6-year results from a randomized clinical trial
Objectives The purpose of this study was to evaluate the clinical performance of removable dental prostheses (RDP) supported by either electroplated (EP-RDP) or cast (C-RDP) double crowns. Material and methods Fifty-four participants received a total of 60 RDP. Two hundred and seventeen abutment tee...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Clinical oral investigations 2015-06, Vol.19 (5), p.1129-1136 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , , , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
container_end_page | 1136 |
---|---|
container_issue | 5 |
container_start_page | 1129 |
container_title | Clinical oral investigations |
container_volume | 19 |
creator | Stober, Thomas Bermejo, Justo Lorenzo Séché, Anne-Christiane Lehmann, Franziska Rammelsberg, Peter Bömicke, Wolfgang |
description | Objectives
The purpose of this study was to evaluate the clinical performance of removable dental prostheses (RDP) supported by either electroplated (EP-RDP) or cast (C-RDP) double crowns.
Material and methods
Fifty-four participants received a total of 60 RDP. Two hundred and seventeen abutment teeth were provided with double crowns. The participants were randomly assigned to two groups (EP-RDP or C-RDP). Re-evaluations took place after 6 months and then once a year up to 6 years. Primary endpoint was survival time for RDP and abutment teeth; secondary endpoints were failure of facing, decementation of primary crown, and post-prosthetic endodontic treatment.
T
,
U
, and chi-squared tests were used to assess the homogeneity of the EP-RDP and C-RDP groups. Survival differences were analyzed with log-rank tests and Cox regression models; secondary endpoints were assessed by the use of logistic regression.
Results
Six-year survival was 77 % for EP-RDP and 97 % for C-RDP. Cumulative survival of abutment teeth was 85 % for EP-RDP and 91 % for C-RDP; differences between survivals in the two groups did not reach statistical significance. Survival of abutment teeth depended on tooth vitality. Failures of facings, decementations, or post-prosthetic endodontic treatments were not different between groups.
Conclusions
To identify possible differences between different double crown systems, longer follow-up periods and/or larger numbers of patients are needed.
Clinical relevance
Survival of teeth supporting double crown-retained RDP is affected by their vitality. Clinical performance was acceptable for both RDP supported by electroplated or cast double crowns. |
doi_str_mv | 10.1007/s00784-014-1335-x |
format | Article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1681908996</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>1681908996</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c508t-473e94d21b858ab43906f7bf5d763de5af1f731c585e8c217386669957b04eec3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp1kUuLFTEQhYMozkN_gBsJuHETTTqdlzsZxlEYcKPrkE5Xaw_pzjVJ61x_vXXnjiKCmyRwvnNS1CHkmeCvBOfmdcXD9oyLngkpFbt9QE5FLzWTxoiHd--OaWfFCTmr9YYjqI18TE46JdHqxCnZXyaIreRdCg1GGtaRxlAbHfM2JKCx5B8rK9DCvKJcYMnfw0EYYW0h0V3JtX2FCvUN1WwPoSBTt9QqnUpeaKAFI_My_0R3TPM6R3S1Mof0hDyaQqrw9P4-J5_fXX66eM-uP159uHh7zaLitrHeSHD92InBKhuGXjquJzNMajRajqDCJCYjRVRWgY2dMNJqrZ1TZuA9QJTn5OUxF2f9tkFtfplrhJTCCnmrXmgrHLfOaURf_IPe5K2sON0d1SntlEVKHClcTq0FJr8r8xLK3gvuD734Yy8e1-0Pvfhb9Dy_T96GBcY_jt9FINAdgYrS-gXKX1__N_UXAbmZqw</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>1681256958</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Electroplated and cast double crown-retained removable dental prostheses: 6-year results from a randomized clinical trial</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>SpringerNature Journals</source><creator>Stober, Thomas ; Bermejo, Justo Lorenzo ; Séché, Anne-Christiane ; Lehmann, Franziska ; Rammelsberg, Peter ; Bömicke, Wolfgang</creator><creatorcontrib>Stober, Thomas ; Bermejo, Justo Lorenzo ; Séché, Anne-Christiane ; Lehmann, Franziska ; Rammelsberg, Peter ; Bömicke, Wolfgang</creatorcontrib><description>Objectives
The purpose of this study was to evaluate the clinical performance of removable dental prostheses (RDP) supported by either electroplated (EP-RDP) or cast (C-RDP) double crowns.
Material and methods
Fifty-four participants received a total of 60 RDP. Two hundred and seventeen abutment teeth were provided with double crowns. The participants were randomly assigned to two groups (EP-RDP or C-RDP). Re-evaluations took place after 6 months and then once a year up to 6 years. Primary endpoint was survival time for RDP and abutment teeth; secondary endpoints were failure of facing, decementation of primary crown, and post-prosthetic endodontic treatment.
T
,
U
, and chi-squared tests were used to assess the homogeneity of the EP-RDP and C-RDP groups. Survival differences were analyzed with log-rank tests and Cox regression models; secondary endpoints were assessed by the use of logistic regression.
Results
Six-year survival was 77 % for EP-RDP and 97 % for C-RDP. Cumulative survival of abutment teeth was 85 % for EP-RDP and 91 % for C-RDP; differences between survivals in the two groups did not reach statistical significance. Survival of abutment teeth depended on tooth vitality. Failures of facings, decementations, or post-prosthetic endodontic treatments were not different between groups.
Conclusions
To identify possible differences between different double crown systems, longer follow-up periods and/or larger numbers of patients are needed.
Clinical relevance
Survival of teeth supporting double crown-retained RDP is affected by their vitality. Clinical performance was acceptable for both RDP supported by electroplated or cast double crowns.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1432-6981</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1436-3771</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1007/s00784-014-1335-x</identifier><identifier>PMID: 25300791</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Berlin/Heidelberg: Springer Berlin Heidelberg</publisher><subject>Adult ; Aged ; Aged, 80 and over ; Crowns ; Dental Abutments ; Dental Prosthesis Design ; Dental Prosthesis Retention ; Dental Restoration Failure ; Dentistry ; Denture, Partial, Removable ; Female ; Humans ; Male ; Medicine ; Middle Aged ; Original Article</subject><ispartof>Clinical oral investigations, 2015-06, Vol.19 (5), p.1129-1136</ispartof><rights>Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2014</rights><rights>Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2015</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c508t-473e94d21b858ab43906f7bf5d763de5af1f731c585e8c217386669957b04eec3</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c508t-473e94d21b858ab43906f7bf5d763de5af1f731c585e8c217386669957b04eec3</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007/s00784-014-1335-x$$EPDF$$P50$$Gspringer$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://link.springer.com/10.1007/s00784-014-1335-x$$EHTML$$P50$$Gspringer$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,27924,27925,41488,42557,51319</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25300791$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Stober, Thomas</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Bermejo, Justo Lorenzo</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Séché, Anne-Christiane</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Lehmann, Franziska</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Rammelsberg, Peter</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Bömicke, Wolfgang</creatorcontrib><title>Electroplated and cast double crown-retained removable dental prostheses: 6-year results from a randomized clinical trial</title><title>Clinical oral investigations</title><addtitle>Clin Oral Invest</addtitle><addtitle>Clin Oral Investig</addtitle><description>Objectives
The purpose of this study was to evaluate the clinical performance of removable dental prostheses (RDP) supported by either electroplated (EP-RDP) or cast (C-RDP) double crowns.
Material and methods
Fifty-four participants received a total of 60 RDP. Two hundred and seventeen abutment teeth were provided with double crowns. The participants were randomly assigned to two groups (EP-RDP or C-RDP). Re-evaluations took place after 6 months and then once a year up to 6 years. Primary endpoint was survival time for RDP and abutment teeth; secondary endpoints were failure of facing, decementation of primary crown, and post-prosthetic endodontic treatment.
T
,
U
, and chi-squared tests were used to assess the homogeneity of the EP-RDP and C-RDP groups. Survival differences were analyzed with log-rank tests and Cox regression models; secondary endpoints were assessed by the use of logistic regression.
Results
Six-year survival was 77 % for EP-RDP and 97 % for C-RDP. Cumulative survival of abutment teeth was 85 % for EP-RDP and 91 % for C-RDP; differences between survivals in the two groups did not reach statistical significance. Survival of abutment teeth depended on tooth vitality. Failures of facings, decementations, or post-prosthetic endodontic treatments were not different between groups.
Conclusions
To identify possible differences between different double crown systems, longer follow-up periods and/or larger numbers of patients are needed.
Clinical relevance
Survival of teeth supporting double crown-retained RDP is affected by their vitality. Clinical performance was acceptable for both RDP supported by electroplated or cast double crowns.</description><subject>Adult</subject><subject>Aged</subject><subject>Aged, 80 and over</subject><subject>Crowns</subject><subject>Dental Abutments</subject><subject>Dental Prosthesis Design</subject><subject>Dental Prosthesis Retention</subject><subject>Dental Restoration Failure</subject><subject>Dentistry</subject><subject>Denture, Partial, Removable</subject><subject>Female</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Male</subject><subject>Medicine</subject><subject>Middle Aged</subject><subject>Original Article</subject><issn>1432-6981</issn><issn>1436-3771</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2015</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><sourceid>ABUWG</sourceid><sourceid>AFKRA</sourceid><sourceid>AZQEC</sourceid><sourceid>BENPR</sourceid><sourceid>CCPQU</sourceid><sourceid>DWQXO</sourceid><sourceid>GNUQQ</sourceid><recordid>eNp1kUuLFTEQhYMozkN_gBsJuHETTTqdlzsZxlEYcKPrkE5Xaw_pzjVJ61x_vXXnjiKCmyRwvnNS1CHkmeCvBOfmdcXD9oyLngkpFbt9QE5FLzWTxoiHd--OaWfFCTmr9YYjqI18TE46JdHqxCnZXyaIreRdCg1GGtaRxlAbHfM2JKCx5B8rK9DCvKJcYMnfw0EYYW0h0V3JtX2FCvUN1WwPoSBTt9QqnUpeaKAFI_My_0R3TPM6R3S1Mof0hDyaQqrw9P4-J5_fXX66eM-uP159uHh7zaLitrHeSHD92InBKhuGXjquJzNMajRajqDCJCYjRVRWgY2dMNJqrZ1TZuA9QJTn5OUxF2f9tkFtfplrhJTCCnmrXmgrHLfOaURf_IPe5K2sON0d1SntlEVKHClcTq0FJr8r8xLK3gvuD734Yy8e1-0Pvfhb9Dy_T96GBcY_jt9FINAdgYrS-gXKX1__N_UXAbmZqw</recordid><startdate>20150601</startdate><enddate>20150601</enddate><creator>Stober, Thomas</creator><creator>Bermejo, Justo Lorenzo</creator><creator>Séché, Anne-Christiane</creator><creator>Lehmann, Franziska</creator><creator>Rammelsberg, Peter</creator><creator>Bömicke, Wolfgang</creator><general>Springer Berlin Heidelberg</general><general>Springer Nature B.V</general><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>3V.</scope><scope>7X7</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>88E</scope><scope>8AO</scope><scope>8C1</scope><scope>8FE</scope><scope>8FH</scope><scope>8FI</scope><scope>8FJ</scope><scope>8FK</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>AZQEC</scope><scope>BBNVY</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>BHPHI</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>FYUFA</scope><scope>GHDGH</scope><scope>GNUQQ</scope><scope>HCIFZ</scope><scope>K9.</scope><scope>LK8</scope><scope>M0S</scope><scope>M1P</scope><scope>M7P</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>PRINS</scope><scope>7X8</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20150601</creationdate><title>Electroplated and cast double crown-retained removable dental prostheses: 6-year results from a randomized clinical trial</title><author>Stober, Thomas ; Bermejo, Justo Lorenzo ; Séché, Anne-Christiane ; Lehmann, Franziska ; Rammelsberg, Peter ; Bömicke, Wolfgang</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c508t-473e94d21b858ab43906f7bf5d763de5af1f731c585e8c217386669957b04eec3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2015</creationdate><topic>Adult</topic><topic>Aged</topic><topic>Aged, 80 and over</topic><topic>Crowns</topic><topic>Dental Abutments</topic><topic>Dental Prosthesis Design</topic><topic>Dental Prosthesis Retention</topic><topic>Dental Restoration Failure</topic><topic>Dentistry</topic><topic>Denture, Partial, Removable</topic><topic>Female</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Male</topic><topic>Medicine</topic><topic>Middle Aged</topic><topic>Original Article</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Stober, Thomas</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Bermejo, Justo Lorenzo</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Séché, Anne-Christiane</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Lehmann, Franziska</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Rammelsberg, Peter</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Bömicke, Wolfgang</creatorcontrib><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>Health & Medical Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Medical Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Pharma Collection</collection><collection>Public Health Database</collection><collection>ProQuest SciTech Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Natural Science Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central UK/Ireland</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Essentials</collection><collection>Biological Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>Natural Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Korea</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Student</collection><collection>SciTech Premium Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Health & Medical Complete (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Biological Science Collection</collection><collection>Health & Medical Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Medical Database</collection><collection>Biological Science Database</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>ProQuest Central China</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>Clinical oral investigations</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Stober, Thomas</au><au>Bermejo, Justo Lorenzo</au><au>Séché, Anne-Christiane</au><au>Lehmann, Franziska</au><au>Rammelsberg, Peter</au><au>Bömicke, Wolfgang</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Electroplated and cast double crown-retained removable dental prostheses: 6-year results from a randomized clinical trial</atitle><jtitle>Clinical oral investigations</jtitle><stitle>Clin Oral Invest</stitle><addtitle>Clin Oral Investig</addtitle><date>2015-06-01</date><risdate>2015</risdate><volume>19</volume><issue>5</issue><spage>1129</spage><epage>1136</epage><pages>1129-1136</pages><issn>1432-6981</issn><eissn>1436-3771</eissn><abstract>Objectives
The purpose of this study was to evaluate the clinical performance of removable dental prostheses (RDP) supported by either electroplated (EP-RDP) or cast (C-RDP) double crowns.
Material and methods
Fifty-four participants received a total of 60 RDP. Two hundred and seventeen abutment teeth were provided with double crowns. The participants were randomly assigned to two groups (EP-RDP or C-RDP). Re-evaluations took place after 6 months and then once a year up to 6 years. Primary endpoint was survival time for RDP and abutment teeth; secondary endpoints were failure of facing, decementation of primary crown, and post-prosthetic endodontic treatment.
T
,
U
, and chi-squared tests were used to assess the homogeneity of the EP-RDP and C-RDP groups. Survival differences were analyzed with log-rank tests and Cox regression models; secondary endpoints were assessed by the use of logistic regression.
Results
Six-year survival was 77 % for EP-RDP and 97 % for C-RDP. Cumulative survival of abutment teeth was 85 % for EP-RDP and 91 % for C-RDP; differences between survivals in the two groups did not reach statistical significance. Survival of abutment teeth depended on tooth vitality. Failures of facings, decementations, or post-prosthetic endodontic treatments were not different between groups.
Conclusions
To identify possible differences between different double crown systems, longer follow-up periods and/or larger numbers of patients are needed.
Clinical relevance
Survival of teeth supporting double crown-retained RDP is affected by their vitality. Clinical performance was acceptable for both RDP supported by electroplated or cast double crowns.</abstract><cop>Berlin/Heidelberg</cop><pub>Springer Berlin Heidelberg</pub><pmid>25300791</pmid><doi>10.1007/s00784-014-1335-x</doi><tpages>8</tpages></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 1432-6981 |
ispartof | Clinical oral investigations, 2015-06, Vol.19 (5), p.1129-1136 |
issn | 1432-6981 1436-3771 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1681908996 |
source | MEDLINE; SpringerNature Journals |
subjects | Adult Aged Aged, 80 and over Crowns Dental Abutments Dental Prosthesis Design Dental Prosthesis Retention Dental Restoration Failure Dentistry Denture, Partial, Removable Female Humans Male Medicine Middle Aged Original Article |
title | Electroplated and cast double crown-retained removable dental prostheses: 6-year results from a randomized clinical trial |
url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-02T12%3A54%3A55IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Electroplated%20and%20cast%20double%20crown-retained%20removable%20dental%20prostheses:%206-year%20results%20from%20a%20randomized%20clinical%20trial&rft.jtitle=Clinical%20oral%20investigations&rft.au=Stober,%20Thomas&rft.date=2015-06-01&rft.volume=19&rft.issue=5&rft.spage=1129&rft.epage=1136&rft.pages=1129-1136&rft.issn=1432-6981&rft.eissn=1436-3771&rft_id=info:doi/10.1007/s00784-014-1335-x&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E1681908996%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=1681256958&rft_id=info:pmid/25300791&rfr_iscdi=true |