A clinical evaluation of all-ceramic bridges placed in patients attending UK general dental practices: Three-year results

Crisp, Russell J; Cowan, A J; Lamb, J; Thompson, Owen E.; Tulloch, N; Burke, F. J. T.

doi:10.1016/j.dental.2010.12.004

Cited by 39 publications

(18 citation statements)

References 15 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Of the 66 publications included for analysis, 42 articles reported on a total of 1973 teeth‐supported 3‐unit FDP distributed over 52 groups of patients (Tables ) …”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

A systematic review and meta‐analysis of 3‐unit fixed dental prostheses: Are the results of 2 abutment implants comparable to the results of 2 abutment teeth?

Pol

Raghoebar

Kerdijk

et al. 2017

J of Oral Rehabilitation

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The purpose of the systematic review and meta-analysis was to compare the performance of 3-unit bridges on teeth with 3-unit bridges on implants, evaluating survival of the bridges, survival of the teeth or implants, condition of the hard and soft tissues surrounding the supports, complications and patient-reported outcome measures (PROM) after a mean observation period of at least 1 year. A literature search was conducted using a combination of the search terms: fixed partial denture and fixed dental prostheses (FDPs). An electronic search for data published until January 2017 was undertaken using the MEDLINE, EMBASE and Cochrane Library databases. Eligibility criteria included clinical human studies, either randomised or not, interventional or observational, which evaluated the results of 3-unit FDPs on either 2 implants or 2 abutment teeth. The search identified 1686 unique references. After applying eligibility criteria, 66 articles were included in the analysis. A total of 1973 3-unit FDPs were supported by teeth, and 765 were implant-supported. No significant differences were found either in the survival of the supporting abutments (P = .52; 99% vs 98.7% survival per year) or in the survival of the prostheses (P = .34; 96.4% vs 97.4% survival per year). Both treatments show an almost equally low complication rate, but there is a low level of reporting of hard and soft tissue conditions and PROM. It is concluded that implant-supported 3-unit FDPs seem to be a reliable treatment with survival rates not significantly different from the results of teeth-supported 3-unit FDPs.

show abstract

“…Of the 66 publications included for analysis, 42 articles reported on a total of 1973 teeth‐supported 3‐unit FDP distributed over 52 groups of patients (Tables ) …”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

A systematic review and meta‐analysis of 3‐unit fixed dental prostheses: Are the results of 2 abutment implants comparable to the results of 2 abutment teeth?

Pol

Raghoebar

Kerdijk

et al. 2017

J of Oral Rehabilitation

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…This could also reflect the growing awareness of the potential success of zirconia frameworks in bridges and crowns. 9 No previous figures are available for practitioner provision of implant dentistry. The involvement of 21% of respondents in one or more aspects of implant therapy is an indication of the impact of this treatment modality on oral healthcare in the UK.…”

Section: Innovationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Contemporary dental practice in the UK: demographic details and practising arrangements in 2008

et al. 2012

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…The introduction of low amounts of Y 2 O 3 (2-3 %mol) into a tetragonal zirconia polycrystal yields a ceramic structure with typical grain size of under 1 μ m and narrow size distribution. As a result of their superior mechanical properties arising from its high crystallinity, yttrium oxide stabilised tetragonal zirconia polycrystals are attractive candidates for various load-bearing dental applications (Crisp et al ., 2012;Tarumi et al ., 2012). However, the same degree of crystallinity renders yttria-stabilised tetragonal zirconia polycrystals highly opaque, which is undesirable for dental restoration from an aesthetic point of view.…”

Section: Zirconiamentioning

confidence: 99%

Bioinert ceramic biomaterials: advanced applications

Ivanova¹,

Bazaka²,

Crawford³

2014

New Functional Biomaterials for Medicine and Healthcare

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A clinical evaluation of all-ceramic bridges placed in patients attending UK general dental practices: Three-year results

Cited by 39 publications

References 15 publications

A systematic review and meta‐analysis of 3‐unit fixed dental prostheses: Are the results of 2 abutment implants comparable to the results of 2 abutment teeth?

A systematic review and meta‐analysis of 3‐unit fixed dental prostheses: Are the results of 2 abutment implants comparable to the results of 2 abutment teeth?

Contemporary dental practice in the UK: demographic details and practising arrangements in 2008

Bioinert ceramic biomaterials: advanced applications

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About