File Download
There are no files associated with this item.
Supplementary
-
Citations:
- Appears in Collections:
Conference Paper: An RCT Comparing Molar Two-and Three-unit RBBs
Title | An RCT Comparing Molar Two-and Three-unit RBBs |
---|---|
Authors | |
Issue Date | 2019 |
Publisher | International Association for Dental Research. The Proceedings' web site is located at https://iadr.abstractarchives.com/home |
Citation | The 97th General Session of the International Association of Dental Research (IADR) held with the 48th Annual Meeting of the American Association for Dental Research (AADR) & the 43rd Annual Meeting of the Canadian Association for Dental Research (CADR), Vancouver, BC, Canada, 19-22 June 2019, Final Presentation ID: 2794 How to Cite? |
Abstract | Objectives: Cantilevered two-unit (CL2), resin-bonded bridges (RBBs) are durable and successful prostheses for missing anterior and premolar teeth. However, the use of CL2 designs for molar-sized edentulous spans goes against previous principles of prosthodontic bridge design. These results update interim findings of a randomized-controlled trial (Clinicaltrial.gov NCT02239718) comparing RBBs of FM3 and CL2 designs for missing molar-sized spans (8-10 mm).
Methods: Patients who had one or more missing molar spans that met the inclusion/extrusion criteria (IRB: UW14-233) were recruited and randomized (ratio 1:1) into CL2 or FM3 group. Patients were examined by independent assessors at different time intervals baseline, 1-, 6-, 12- and 24-month after cementation. Retention of the prosthesis was evaluated as well as patient’s satisfaction and oral health-related quality of life were evaluated by 14-item questionnaire and OHIP-49 respectively.
Results: Seventy-six patients were enrolled and ninety-five RBBs were randomized into forty-five CL2 and fifty FM3 designs. Sixty seven patients were reviewed at 1-month, thirty-five at 6-months, 30 at 12-month and 10 at 24-months. The majority of the prostheses were provided by undergraduate dental students. Two CL2 and one FM3 RBBs debonded resulting in retention rate of 95.6% and 98.0%. They were all rebonded. Patient reported outcome evaluations and OHIP were analysed by t-test for the two groups and no differences were observed (P> 0.05) and no adverse outcomes were reported such as tipping or discomfort.
Conclusions: The most recent data of this study show that CL2 RBBs can be successfully placed for single molar spans with no observable complications. Longer term data is being collected. |
Description | Poster presentation - Final Presentation ID: 2794 |
Persistent Identifier | http://hdl.handle.net/10722/278327 |
DC Field | Value | Language |
---|---|---|
dc.contributor.author | Botelho, MG | - |
dc.contributor.author | Lam, YH | - |
dc.date.accessioned | 2019-10-04T08:11:51Z | - |
dc.date.available | 2019-10-04T08:11:51Z | - |
dc.date.issued | 2019 | - |
dc.identifier.citation | The 97th General Session of the International Association of Dental Research (IADR) held with the 48th Annual Meeting of the American Association for Dental Research (AADR) & the 43rd Annual Meeting of the Canadian Association for Dental Research (CADR), Vancouver, BC, Canada, 19-22 June 2019, Final Presentation ID: 2794 | - |
dc.identifier.uri | http://hdl.handle.net/10722/278327 | - |
dc.description | Poster presentation - Final Presentation ID: 2794 | - |
dc.description.abstract | Objectives: Cantilevered two-unit (CL2), resin-bonded bridges (RBBs) are durable and successful prostheses for missing anterior and premolar teeth. However, the use of CL2 designs for molar-sized edentulous spans goes against previous principles of prosthodontic bridge design. These results update interim findings of a randomized-controlled trial (Clinicaltrial.gov NCT02239718) comparing RBBs of FM3 and CL2 designs for missing molar-sized spans (8-10 mm). Methods: Patients who had one or more missing molar spans that met the inclusion/extrusion criteria (IRB: UW14-233) were recruited and randomized (ratio 1:1) into CL2 or FM3 group. Patients were examined by independent assessors at different time intervals baseline, 1-, 6-, 12- and 24-month after cementation. Retention of the prosthesis was evaluated as well as patient’s satisfaction and oral health-related quality of life were evaluated by 14-item questionnaire and OHIP-49 respectively. Results: Seventy-six patients were enrolled and ninety-five RBBs were randomized into forty-five CL2 and fifty FM3 designs. Sixty seven patients were reviewed at 1-month, thirty-five at 6-months, 30 at 12-month and 10 at 24-months. The majority of the prostheses were provided by undergraduate dental students. Two CL2 and one FM3 RBBs debonded resulting in retention rate of 95.6% and 98.0%. They were all rebonded. Patient reported outcome evaluations and OHIP were analysed by t-test for the two groups and no differences were observed (P> 0.05) and no adverse outcomes were reported such as tipping or discomfort. Conclusions: The most recent data of this study show that CL2 RBBs can be successfully placed for single molar spans with no observable complications. Longer term data is being collected. | - |
dc.language | eng | - |
dc.publisher | International Association for Dental Research. The Proceedings' web site is located at https://iadr.abstractarchives.com/home | - |
dc.relation.ispartof | IADR/AADR/CADR 2019 General Session & Exhibition | - |
dc.title | An RCT Comparing Molar Two-and Three-unit RBBs | - |
dc.type | Conference_Paper | - |
dc.identifier.email | Botelho, MG: botelho@hkucc.hku.hk | - |
dc.identifier.email | Lam, YH: retlaw@hku.hk | - |
dc.identifier.authority | Botelho, MG=rp00033 | - |
dc.identifier.authority | Lam, YH=rp02183 | - |
dc.identifier.hkuros | 307029 | - |
dc.publisher.place | Vancouver, Canada | - |