Six-year follow-up assessment of prosthesis survival and oral health-related quality of life in individuals with partial edentulism treated with three types of prosthodontic rehabilitation

Abstract

Purpose: The purpose of the study was to compare the long-term performance of three prostheses for partial edentulism: implant-supported, fixed denture (IFD), fixed partial denture (FPD), and removable partial denture (RPD), in terms of prosthesis survival and oral health-related quality of life (OHRQoL). Methods: The 138 patients in our previous study (Kimura et al., 2012) received one of the three prosthetic treatments and answered a validated OHRQoL questionnaire before and immediately after treatment. In the present study, the patients were followed up six years after treatment using medical records and OHRQoL examinations to evaluate prosthesis survival and change in OHRQoL. The cumulative survival rates were calculated using the Kaplan-Meier analysis. The Steel-Dwass test was used to compare the median OHRQoL scores at the three time points. Results: For the 105 patients (66.8 ± 10.8 years, IFD/FPD/RPD: 58/27/20 patients) who successfully completed the follow-up assessments, the six-year estimated cumulative survival rates of the IFDs, FPDs, and RPDs were 94.7%, 77.4%, and 33.3%, respectively. The log-rank tests indicated that the survival curves were significantly different (IFDs vs. FPDs: p = 0.01; RPDs vs. IFDs, FPDs: p < 0.01). The median OHRQoL scores of the IFD group immediately after treatment and six years after treatment were significantly higher than those observed before treatment (p < 0.01). There was no significant difference in the median OHRQoL scores among the three time points in the RPD or FPD groups. Conclusions: IFDs showed significantly longer survival rates than FPDs and RPDs in partially edentulous patients. Only in the IFD patients was the OHRQoL level six years after treatment significantly higher than that before treatment.

Oral health‐related quality of life of patients rehabilitated with fixed and removable implant‐supported dental prostheses

“…The oral health‐related quality of life scores for the implant‐supported fixed denture group immediately after treatment and 6 years after treatment were significantly higher than those observed before treatment. However, there was no improvement in the oral health‐related quality of life scores in the fixed partial denture or removable partial denture groups compared with before treatment 69 …”

“…Kurosaki et al 69 compared the long‐term performance of three different prosthetic reconstruction types—implant‐supported fixed denture, fixed partial denture, and removable partial denture—in terms of prosthetic survival and oral health‐related quality of life. Concerning survival, the 6‐year cumulative survival rates of the implant‐supported fixed dentures, fixed dentures, and removable partial dentures were 94.7%, 77.4%, and 33.3%, respectively.…”

“…However, there was no improvement in the oral health‐related quality of life scores in the fixed partial denture or removable partial denture groups compared with before treatment. 69 …”

“…Recently, it was reported that tooth loss had a negative impact on eating in public and forming close interhuman relationships. 68 Kurosaki et al 69 compared the long-term performance of three different prosthetic reconstruction types-implant-supported fixed denture, fixed partial denture, and removable partial denture-in terms of prosthetic survival and oral health-related quality of life.…”

“…However, there was no improvement in the oral healthrelated quality of life scores in the fixed partial denture or removable partial denture groups compared with before treatment. 69 F I G U R E 4 Clinical view at 3 months following nonsurgical periodontal therapy (ie, step 2 of periodontal therapy)…”