Prospective evaluation of implants-supported, tooth-implant supported, and teeth-supported 3-unit posterior monolithic zirconia fixed restorations: Bite force and patient satisfaction

被引:5
|
作者
Altayyar, Sadeq [1 ]
Al-Zordk, Walid [2 ]
Algabri, Radwan [1 ,3 ,8 ]
Rajah, Eshraq [4 ]
Al-baadani, Abdulsattar [5 ]
Alqutaibi, Ahmed Yaseen [6 ,7 ]
Madina, Manal Abo [2 ]
Ghazy, Mohammed H. [2 ]
机构
[1] IBB Univ, Fac Dent, Prosthodont Dept, Ibb, Yemen
[2] Mansoura Univ, Fac Dent, Fixed Prosthodont Dept, Mansoura, Egypt
[3] Natl Univ, Prosthodont Dept, Ibb Branch, Ibb, Yemen
[4] Sanaa Univ, Fac Dent, Prosthodont Dept, Sanaa, Yemen
[5] Dhamar Univ, Fac Dent, Fixed Prosthodont Dept, Dhamar, Yemen
[6] Taibah Univ, Coll Dent, Dept & Implant Dent, Al Madinah, Saudi Arabia
[7] Ibb Univ, Coll Dent, Dept Prosthodont, Ibb, Yemen
[8] IBB Univ, Fac Dent, Prosthodont Dept, Ibb 70270, Yemen
来源
关键词
biting force; implant; monolithic zirconia; patient satisfaction; DENTAL PROSTHESES; PARTIAL DENTURES; RETROSPECTIVE EVALUATION; MASTICATORY EFFICIENCY; COMPLICATION RATES; CONNECTING TEETH; SURVIVAL; METAANALYSIS; INDIVIDUALS;
D O I
10.1002/cre2.780
中图分类号
R78 [口腔科学];
学科分类号
1003 ;
摘要
ObjectivesThis study aimed to evaluate the maximum bite force (MBF) and satisfaction of patients restored with implants, combined tooth-implants, and teeth-supported monolithic zirconia fixed dental prostheses (FDPs).Materials and MethodsThirty partially edentulous patients in need of three units of FDPs in their mandibular posterior region were divided into three equal groups (n = 10) as follows: Group-1 patients received two implants for each at the second premolar and second molar regions, Group-2 patients received one implant for each at the second molar region, and Group-3 patients with missing lower first molar. All the restorations were constructed from monolithic zirconia. Patients were evaluated 1 week after placement of restorations (baseline) and then after 6, 12, and 24-month intervals for MBF using force transducer occlusal force meter and satisfaction (function, esthetic, and overall satisfaction) using a visual analog scale.ResultsThe mean MBF for Group 1 was higher than Group 2 (p = .044) but not that of Group 3 (p = .923). Additionally, Group 3 displayed a higher MBF than Group 2, although this difference was not statistically significant (p = .096). Concerning patient satisfaction, all study groups reported high levels of satisfaction across all satisfaction elements, and no significant differences were observed between the groups.ConclusionWithin the limitations of this study, it can be concluded that Group 1 gives comparable anticipated treatment outcomes as Group 3 concerning biting force and patient satisfaction. However, Group 2 gives comparable satisfaction results with biting force value within the normal range; thus, it might be used as a treatment option in a specific situation.
引用
收藏
页码:810 / 819
页数:10
相关论文
共 16 条
  • [1] Retrospective and clinical evaluation of retrievable, tooth-implant supported zirconia-ceramic restorations
    Mundt, Torsten
    Heinemann, Friedhelm
    Schankath, Christof
    Schwahn, Christian
    Biffar, Reiner
    ACTA ODONTOLOGICA SCANDINAVICA, 2013, 71 (05) : 1326 - 1334
  • [2] Patient Satisfaction with Implant-Supported Monolithic and Partially Veneered Zirconia Restorations
    De Angelis, Paolo
    Gasparini, Giulio
    Rella, Edoardo
    De Angelis, Silvio
    Grippaudo, Cristina
    D'Addona, Antonio
    Manicone, Paolo Francesco
    BIOMED RESEARCH INTERNATIONAL, 2021, 2021
  • [3] A retrospective comparison of clinical outcomes of implant restorations for posterior edentulous area: 3-unit bridge supported by 2 implants vs 3 splinted implant-supported crowns
    Yi, Yuseung
    Heo, Seong-Joo
    Koak, Jai-Young
    Kim, Seong-Kyun
    JOURNAL OF ADVANCED PROSTHODONTICS, 2022, 14 (04): : 223 - 235
  • [4] Oral and Periodontal Risk Factors of Prosthetic Success for 3-Unit Natural Tooth-Supported Bridges versus Implant-Supported Fixed Dental Prostheses
    Cristea, Ioana
    Agop-Forna, Doriana
    Martu, Maria-Alexandra
    Dascalu, Cristina
    Topoliceanu, Claudiu
    Torok, Roland
    Torok, Bianca
    Bardis, Dimitrios
    Bardi, Panagiota Moulavasili
    Forna, Norina
    DIAGNOSTICS, 2023, 13 (05)
  • [5] Biomechanical behavior of cantilevered 3-unit implant-supported prostheses made of PEKK and monolithic zirconia: A finite element study
    Sadek, Hatem S.
    Anany, Noha M.
    El-Anwar, Mohamed I.
    Alhotan, Abdulaziz
    Diab, Al-Hassan
    Aldesoki, Mostafa
    Elshazly, Tarek M.
    Bourauel, Christoph
    JOURNAL OF THE MECHANICAL BEHAVIOR OF BIOMEDICAL MATERIALS, 2025, 163
  • [6] Prospective evaluation of zirconia based tooth- and implant-supported fixed dental prostheses: 3-Year results
    Konstantinidis, Ioannis K.
    Jacoby, Stephan
    Raedel, Michael
    Boening, Klaus
    JOURNAL OF DENTISTRY, 2015, 43 (01) : 87 - 93
  • [7] Monolithic zirconia single tooth implant-supported restorations with CAD/CAM titanium abutments in the posterior region: A 1-year prospective case series study
    Donker, Vincent J. J.
    Raghoebar, Gerry M.
    Jensen-Louwerse, Charlotte
    Vissink, Arjan
    Meijer, Henny J. A.
    CLINICAL IMPLANT DENTISTRY AND RELATED RESEARCH, 2022, 24 (01) : 125 - 132
  • [8] Tooth-implant-supported posterior fixed dental prostheses with zirconia frameworks: 3-year clinical result
    Beuer, Florian
    Sachs, Caroline
    Groesser, Julian
    Gueth, Jan-Frederik
    Stimmelmayr, Michael
    CLINICAL ORAL INVESTIGATIONS, 2016, 20 (05) : 1079 - 1086
  • [9] Tooth-implant-supported posterior fixed dental prostheses with zirconia frameworks: 3-year clinical result
    Florian Beuer
    Caroline Sachs
    Julian Groesser
    Jan-Frederik Gueth
    Michael Stimmelmayr
    Clinical Oral Investigations, 2016, 20 : 1079 - 1086
  • [10] Biomechanical finite element analysis of short-implant-supported, 3-unit, fixed CAD/CAM prostheses in the posterior mandible
    Cepic, Lana Zupancic
    Frank, Martin
    Reisinger, Andreas
    Pahr, Dieter
    Zechner, Werner
    Schedle, Andreas
    INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF IMPLANT DENTISTRY, 2022, 8 (01)