首页> 外文期刊>Dental materials >Standardizing failure, success, and survival decisions in clinical studies of ceramic and metal-ceramic fixed dental prostheses
【24h】

Standardizing failure, success, and survival decisions in clinical studies of ceramic and metal-ceramic fixed dental prostheses

机译:在陶瓷和金属陶瓷固定式牙修复体的临床研究中标准化失败,成功和生存决策

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

"Nothing worthwhile is ever without complications." Nora Roberts The recent increase in reports from clinical studies of ceramic chipping has raised the question of which criteria should constitute success or failure of total-ceramic prostheses. Terminologies such as minor chipping [1], partial chipping, technical complications [2,3], and biological complications have crept into the dental terminology and they have complicated our classification of success and failure of these crown and bridge restorations. Some journals have permitted the reporting of fractures as "complications" and they are not necessarily classified as failures in the study. One study has attempted to classify chipping fractures according to their severity and subsequent treatment [4]. This is a promising approach to resolve the challenges to the classification of chipping fracture. The term 'chipping fracture' is more descriptive than 'chipping' since the latter term tends to imply an event of minor consequence. Two types of statistics are reported routinely in these studies, i.e., percent success, which is a measure of restorations that survive without any adverse effects, and percent survival, which is a measure of all restorations that survive even though they may have exhibited chipping fracture or they may have been repaired. Why has this scenario occurred? One possible explanation is that many of these types of fractures are very small and do not affect function or esthetics. Another reason is that corporate sponsors prefer to use the term chipping since it does not connote failure in the sense that the term fracture does. In any event, we need to be more precise in our scientific observations of fracture and classifications of the various types of fracture including details on the location of fracture and the prosthesis design configuration. Because of the lack of standardized methods for describing chipping fractures, materials scientists are unable to properly analyze the effect of material properties and design factors on the time-dependent survival probability of ceramic fixed dental prostheses (FDPs). Based on the review of clinical trials and systematic reviews of these trials, the present study was designed to develop guidelines for classifying the functional performance, success, survival, and susceptibility to chipping fracture, and subsequent treatment of ceramic and metal-ceramic restorations. Objective. To develop comprehensive descriptive guidelines and a clinical reporting form to assist dental scientists in their analyses of chipping fracture behavior of metal-ceramic and all-ceramic prostheses with particular emphasis on veneered-zirconia restorations. These guidelines are required to optimize the recording of fracture features that can be used to differentiate ceramic chipping fracture from bulk fracture and to assist dentists in identifying subsequent treatment that may minimize the need to replace affected restorations. A recording form for clinical fracture observations must be sufficiently clear and complete so that dental health professionals can translate the most relevant information in a context that allows their patients to fully understand the potential risks and benefits of treatment with ceramic restorations. It should clearly allow a clinician to determine whether or not a ceramic fracture constitutes a failure, which requires replacement of the prosthesis, or whether the fracture surface is relatively small or located in a nonfunctional area, i.e., one that is not contribute to occlusion, esthetics, proximal contacts, or food impaction. To accomplish this task, a review of the relevant publications of clinical trials was necessary to identify the variability in reporting of fracture events. The reviews were focused on clinical research studies of zirconia-based FDPs and PFM FDPs, which had been monitored through recall exams for three years or more. These reports and systematic reviews of all relevant publications were published in English dental journals between 2004 and 2010.The primary focus in this review was on the susceptibility to chipping fracture or bulk fracture of veneered zirconia-based fixed dental prostheses (FDPs) and metal-ceramic FDPs, which are also referred to in this paper as porcelain-fused-to-metal (PFM) FDPs.
机译:“没有任何事情是没有复杂的。”诺拉·罗伯茨(Nora Roberts)最近从陶瓷切屑的临床研究中获得的报告增加了一个问题,即哪个标准应该构成全陶瓷假体的成败。诸如小碎屑[1],部分碎屑,技术并发症[2,3]和生物学并发症等术语已悄悄渗入到牙科术语中,它们使我们对这些牙冠和牙桥修复体的成败分类变得复杂。一些期刊允许将骨折报告为“并发症”,在研究中未必将其归类为失败。一项研究试图根据崩裂性骨折的严重程度和随后的治疗方法对其进行分类[4]。这是解决切屑断裂分类挑战的一种有前途的方法。术语“碎裂”比“碎裂”更具描述性,因为后者倾向于暗示次要后果。在这些研究中,常规报告了两种类型的统计数据,即成功百分比(可以衡量没有受到不利影响的修复体的生存率)和生存百分比(可以衡量即使出现了崩裂骨折也可以生存的所有修复体)否则它们可能已被修复。为什么会发生这种情况?一种可能的解释是,其中许多类型的骨折非常小,并且不会影响功能或美观。另一个原因是,公司赞助商更喜欢使用“崩裂”一词,因为它在破裂一词的意义上并不意味着失败。无论如何,我们都需要在对骨折的科学观察和各种类型的骨折的分类中更加精确,包括骨折位置和假体设计配置的详细信息。由于缺乏用于描述崩裂性骨折的标准化方法,材料科学家无法适当地分析材料特性和设计因素对陶瓷固定式牙修复体(FDP)随时间变化的存活率的影响。基于临床试验的回顾和对这些试验的系统评价,本研究旨在制定指导原则,以对功能性能,成功率,生存率和崩裂敏感性进行分类,并对陶瓷和金属陶瓷修复体进行后续治疗。目的。制定全面的描述性指南和临床报告表格,以帮助牙科科学家分析金属陶瓷假体和全陶瓷假体的碎裂行为,特别是单板氧化锆修复体。需要这些准则来优化骨折特征的记录,这些记录可用于区分陶瓷碎裂骨折和整体骨折,并帮助牙医确定可以最大程度减少更换受影响修复体的后续治疗。临床骨折观察的记录表必须足够清晰和完整,以便牙科保健专业人员可以在允许患者充分了解陶瓷修复体治疗的潜在风险和益处的情况下翻译最相关的信息。显然,应允许临床医生确定陶瓷骨折是否构成了故障,需要更换假体,或者骨折表面是否相对较小或位于无功能区域,即无助于闭塞的区域,美学,近端接触或食物撞击。为了完成这项任务,有必要对相关的临床试验出版物进行回顾,以确定骨折事件报告的变异性。审查的重点是基于氧化锆的FDP和PFM FDP的临床研究,这些研究通过召回考试进行了三年或更长时间的监控。这些报告和所有相关出版物的系统评价在2004年至2010年期间在英语牙科期刊上发表。本综述的主要重点是单板氧化锆基固定式牙修复体(FDP)和金属牙合板易碎裂或大块骨折。陶瓷FDP,在本文中也称为瓷熔金属(PFM)FDP。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号