Sareh Habibzadeh, Faranak Khamisi, Seyed Ali Mosaddad, Gustavo Vicentis de Oliveira Fernandes, Artak Heboyan
{"title":"全陶瓷树脂粘结固定义齿:系统综述。","authors":"Sareh Habibzadeh, Faranak Khamisi, Seyed Ali Mosaddad, Gustavo Vicentis de Oliveira Fernandes, Artak Heboyan","doi":"10.1177/22808000241250118","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>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.</p>","PeriodicalId":14985,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Applied Biomaterials & Functional Materials","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Full-ceramic resin-bonded fixed dental prostheses: A systematic review.\",\"authors\":\"Sareh Habibzadeh, Faranak Khamisi, Seyed Ali Mosaddad, Gustavo Vicentis de Oliveira Fernandes, Artak Heboyan\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/22808000241250118\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>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.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":14985,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Applied Biomaterials & Functional Materials\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Applied Biomaterials & Functional Materials\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"5\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/22808000241250118\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"BIOPHYSICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Applied Biomaterials & Functional Materials","FirstCategoryId":"5","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/22808000241250118","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"BIOPHYSICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
Full-ceramic resin-bonded fixed dental prostheses: A systematic review.
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.
期刊介绍:
The Journal of Applied Biomaterials & Functional Materials (JABFM) is an open access, peer-reviewed, international journal considering the publication of original contributions, reviews and editorials dealing with clinical and laboratory investigations in the fast growing field of biomaterial sciences and functional materials.
The areas covered by the journal will include:
• Biomaterials / Materials for biomedical applications
• Functional materials
• Hybrid and composite materials
• Soft materials
• Hydrogels
• Nanomaterials
• Gene delivery
• Nonodevices
• Metamaterials
• Active coatings
• Surface functionalization
• Tissue engineering
• Cell delivery/cell encapsulation systems
• 3D printing materials
• Material characterization
• Biomechanics