Full-ceramic resin-bonded fixed dental prostheses: A systematic review

Author:

Habibzadeh Sareh12,Khamisi Faranak3,Mosaddad Seyed Ali456,Fernandes Gustavo Vicentis de Oliveira7ORCID,Heboyan Artak8ORCID

Affiliation:

1. Department of Prosthodontics, School of Dentistry, International Campus, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran

2. Dental Research Center, Dentistry Research Institute, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran

3. School of Dentistry, International Campus, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran

4. Department of Research Analytics, Saveetha Dental College and Hospitals, Saveetha Institute of Medical and Technical Sciences, Saveetha University, Chennai, India

5. Student Research Committee, School of Dentistry, Shiraz University of Medical Sciences, Shiraz, Iran

6. Faculty of Odontology, Department of Conservative Dentistry and Bucofacial Prosthesis, Complutense University of Madrid, Madrid, Spain

7. Department of Periodontics and Oral Medicine, University of Michigan School of Dentistry, Ann Arbor, MI, USA

8. Faculty of Stomatology, Department of Prosthodontics, Yerevan State Medical University after Mkhitar Heratsi, Yerevan, Armenia

Abstract

Despite the development of implant-supported prostheses, there are still patients for whom conservative treatments such as resin-bonded fixed dental prostheses (RBFDPs) are more appropriate. This study’s objective was to analyze the available research on full-ceramic RBFDPs. In this study, Web of Science, MEDLINE/PubMed, Scopus, Embase, Cochrane Library, and Google Scholar databases were searched for articles published in English between 2010 and 2020. A total of 14 studies were reviewed based on the eligibility criteria. The results showed that using a cantilever design with one abutment had an advantage over two abutments. Additionally, it was proposed that preparations designed with retentive aids, such as a proximal box, groove, and pinhole, could improve RBFDP survival rates. IPS e.max ZirCAD, In-Ceram alumina, and zirconia CAD/CAM were the most commonly used framework materials. Most studies used air abrasion, salinization, or hydrofluoric acid for surface treatment. Adhesive resin cements were the most frequently used type of cement. The survival rate of In-Ceram ceramics (85.3%–94.8%) was lower than that of In-Ceram zirconia and IPS e.max ZirCAD. Debonding, followed by framework fracture, was the leading cause of failure. Following 3–10 years follow-up, the survival percentage of all-ceramic RBFDPs ranged from 76% to 100%. Although RBFDPs have demonstrated satisfactory success as a conservative treatment, long-term follow-ups and higher sample sizes in clinical research are required to gain more reliable outcomes on the clinical success rate of various RBFDP designs.

Publisher

SAGE Publications

Cited by 1 articles. 订阅此论文施引文献 订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3