目的:本综述的目的是评估已经检查材料的临床试验,设计,和陶瓷悬臂树脂粘合固定假牙(RBFDP)的粘合,作为替代前牙缺失的潜在选择。评估主要集中在修复失败率和临床并发症。
方法:彻底搜索数据库,包括PubMed/MEDLINE,Scopus,还有Cochrane图书馆,进行了。最近的搜索是在2023年10月进行的。包括比较陶瓷悬臂式RBFDP与双保持器或使用不同陶瓷材料或粘合系统的悬臂式RBFDP的临床研究。考虑的结果指标是恢复失败和并发症发生率。
结果:12项研究符合资格标准。汇总数据显示,与双保持器设计相比,使用悬臂设计时并发症事件有统计学显著减少(p<0.05);然而,在修复失败方面,两种设计之间没有发现差异。悬臂RBFDP的并发症和失败率在使用含磷酸盐单体的luting树脂之前,无论是否使用陶瓷底漆,均无统计学差异(p>0.05)。
结论:陶瓷悬臂式RBFDP的并发症发生率低于双固定器。在将复合树脂用于陶瓷悬臂式RBFDP之前,使用陶瓷底漆可以减少并发症和故障的发生。尽管这种影响没有统计学意义。需要额外的研究来证实这些发现。玻璃陶瓷悬臂RBFDPs在6年后显示成功减少,需要持续监测,但是氧化锆和玻璃渗透氧化铝悬臂RBFDP都具有出色的长期成功率和长达10年和15年的存活率。
结论:前区的悬臂陶瓷RBFDP是一种侵入性较小且有价值的治疗选择,提供良好的美学效果。
OBJECTIVE: The objective of this review was to assess clinical trials that have examined the materials, design, and bonding of ceramic cantilevered resin-bonded fixed dental prostheses (RBFDPs) as a potential option for replacing missing anterior teeth. The evaluation primarily focuses on the rate of restoration failure and clinical complications.
METHODS: A thorough search of databases including PubMed/MEDLINE, Scopus, and the Cochrane Library, was conducted. The most recent search was performed in October 2023. Clinical studies that compared ceramic cantilevered RBFDPs with double retainers or cantilevered RBFDPs using different ceramic materials or bonding systems were included. The outcome measures considered were restoration failure and complication rates.
RESULTS: Twelve studies met the eligibility criteria. The pooled data showed a statistically significant decrease in complication events when using
cantilever designs compared with double retainer designs (p < 0.05); however, there were no differences found between the two designs in terms of restoration failure. The complication and failure rate of
cantilever RBFDPs did not show a statistically significant difference with or without ceramic primer application before luting with phosphate monomer-containing luting resin (p > 0.05).
CONCLUSIONS: Ceramic cantilevered RBFDPs have lower complication rates compared with those with double retainers. The use of a ceramic primer prior to luting composite resin for ceramic cantilevered RBFDPs decreases the occurrence of complications and failures, although this effect was not statistically significant. Additional research is required to confirm these findings. Glass ceramic
cantilever RBFDPs showed a decrease in success after 6 years, requiring ongoing monitoring, but both zirconia and glass-infiltrated alumina
cantilever RBFDPs have demonstrated durability with excellent long-term success and survival rates for up to 10 and 15 years.
CONCLUSIONS: Cantilever ceramic RBFDPs in the anterior region are a less invasive and valuable treatment option, providing good esthetic results.