首页> 外文期刊>Clinical oral implants research >Full-arch implant-supported rehabilitations: A prospective study comparing porcelain-veneered zirconia frameworks to monolithic zirconia
【24h】

Full-arch implant-supported rehabilitations: A prospective study comparing porcelain-veneered zirconia frameworks to monolithic zirconia

机译:全拱植入支持的康复:一项潜在的研究将瓷贴身氧化锆框架与单片氧化锆进行比较

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
       

摘要

Objectives To evaluate the performance of two types of zirconia frameworks. Material and Methods From 2014 to 2016, in a prospective clinical trial, 150 patients were rehabilitated with 83 and 110 implant-supported, screw-retained, full-arch ceramic-veneered zirconia (PVZ) rehabilitations and monolithic zirconia with porcelain veneering limited to buccal (MZ) rehabilitations, respectively. Patients were consecutively enlisted according to pre-defined inclusion criteria and evaluated on 4 months intervals. A Kaplan-Meier estimator was adopted, and the log-rank test and Wilcoxon test used to test differences in survival and successful function in the two different groups. Results The average follow-up time (+/- SD) and implant success rate was 608.80 +/- 172.52 days with 99.53% implant success for the PVZ group and 552.63 +/- 197.57 days with 99.83% success for the MZ group. According to the Kaplan-Meier estimator, the mean cumulative survival rate at the 2-year follow-up for framework fracture, major chipping, minor chipping, or any of the former combined to occur was 0.99, 0.95, 0.93 and 0.85 for the PVZ group (n = 18) and 0.99, 0.95, 0.95 and 0.89 for the MZ group (n = 15). No significant differences were found between the two groups. Conclusions
机译:目标评估两种类型的氧化锆框架的性能。 2014年至2016年的材料和方法,在前瞻性临床试验中,150名患者用83和110植入的植入式,螺旋保留,全拱形陶瓷胶合氧化锆(PVZ)康复和整体氧化锆,其与瓷贴花限于Buccal (MZ)康复分别。根据预定义的纳入标准进行连续征集患者,并在4个月间隔进行评估。采用了KAPLAN-MEIER估算器,以及用于测试两种不同组中存活和成功功能的差异的日志秩检验和威尔克森测试。结果平均随访时间(+/-SD)和植入物成功率为608.80 +/- 172.52天,PVZ集团的植入成功99.53%,552.63 +/- 197.57天,MZ集团成功99.83%。根据Kaplan-Meier估算器,PVZ的2年框架断裂,主要碎裂,次要切屑或任何以前组合的2年后续随访的平均累积存活率为0.99,0.95,0.93和0.85 MZ组(N = 18)和0.99,0.95,0.95和0.89(n = 15)。两组之间没有发现显着差异。结论

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