PURPOSE: We clarified cumulative survival and event-free rates of resin-bonded fixed dental prostheses (RBFDPs) and compared them to those of fixed dental prostheses (FDPs) to refine risk factors for non-survival/event and use of tooth extraction after the period of non-survival/event. METHODS: Study subjects were selected among all patients who consecutively attended the Fixed Prosthodontic Clinic of Okayama University Hospital. Eligible patients were those who received 3-unit metal-framed 2-retainer (wing-wing) RBFDPs or conventional full-coverage FDPs (RBFDPs/FDPs: 129/177 prostheses). Data were analyzed by Kaplan-Meier analysis with the log-rank test, Mann-Whitney test, chi-square test, and Cox proportional hazards analysis. RESULTS: The 15-year cumulative survival rates were 66.5% for the RBFDP group and 61.6% for the FDP group, which were not significantly different (p = 0.59). The 15-year cumulative event-free rates were 53.4% for the RBFDP group and 59.2% for the FDP group, which were not significantly different (p = 0.52). No significant risk factors related to non-survival and event-free of RBFDPs/FDPs were identified in the analysis model using treatment method, sex, age, number of remaining teeth, and treatment site as explanatory variables. The number of cases in which RBFDPs/FDPs resulted in non-survival due to abutment tooth extraction was significantly lower in RBFDPs (p < 0.01). Further, the abutment tooth as a non-vital tooth was identified as a risk factor for RBFDPs/FDPs resulting in non-survival due to abutment tooth extraction. CONCLUSIONS: The present study is the first to indicate RBFDP as a prosthetic treatment option which should be selected for patients with slight or no abutment tooth decay.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Yoshida et al. (2019) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: