Department of Restorative, Preventive and Pediatric Dentistry, School of Dental Medicine, University of Bern, Switzerland; Department of Biohybrid & Medical Textiles, Institute of Applied Medical Engineering, RWTH Aachen University, Aachen, Germany.
Private Practice Norden, Germany.
Dent Mater. 2021 Aug;37(8):1273-1282. doi: 10.1016/j.dental.2021.04.005. Epub 2021 May 7.
The aim of this prospective, multi-center, practice-based cohort study was to analyze factors associated with the success of all-ceramic crowns.
All-ceramic crowns placed in a practice-based research network ([Ceramic Success Analysis, AG Keramik) were analyzed. Data from 1254 patients with (mostly in-office CAD/CAM) all-ceramic crowns placed by 101 dentists being followed up for more than 5 years were evaluated. At the last follow-up visit crowns were considered as successful (not failed) if they were sufficient, whereas crowns were considered as survived (not lost) if they were still in function. Multi-level Cox proportional hazards models were used to evaluate the association between a range of predictors and time of success or survival.
Within a mean follow-up period (SD) of 7.2(2)years [maximum:15years] 776 crowns were considered successful (annual failure rate[AFR]:8.4%) and 1041 crowns survived (AFR:4.9%). The presence of a post in endodontically treated teeth resulted in a risk for failure 2.7 times lower than that of restorations without a post (95%CI:1.4-5.0;p = 0.002). Regarding the restorative material and adhesive technique, hybrid composite ceramics and single-step adhesives showed a 3.4 and 2.2 times higher failure rate than feldspathic porcelain and multi-step adhesives, respectively (p < 0.001). Use of an oxygen-blocking gel as well as an EVA instrument resulted in a 1.5-1.8 times higher failure rate than their non-use (p ≤ 0.001).
After up to 15years AFR were rather high for all-ceramic crowns. Operative factors, but no patient- or tooth-level factors were significantly associated with failure. The study was registered in the German Clinical Trials Register (DRKS-ID: DRKS00020271).
本前瞻性、多中心、基于实践的队列研究旨在分析全瓷冠成功的相关因素。
对基于实践的研究网络([陶瓷成功分析,AG 陶瓷)中放置的全瓷冠进行分析。对 101 名牙医在 1254 名患者中进行的全瓷冠治疗进行了随访超过 5 年的数据进行了评估,这些患者主要进行了 CAD/CAM 诊室修复。在最后一次随访时,如果全瓷冠功能充足,则认为其成功(未失败),如果全瓷冠仍在使用中,则认为其存活(未丢失)。使用多级 Cox 比例风险模型来评估一系列预测因子与成功或存活时间之间的关系。
在平均(SD)7.2(2)年(最长 15 年)的随访期内,776 个全瓷冠被认为成功(年失败率[AFR]:8.4%),1041 个全瓷冠存活(AFR:4.9%)。在根管治疗的牙齿中使用桩的修复体的失败风险比没有桩的修复体低 2.7 倍(95%CI:1.4-5.0;p = 0.002)。关于修复材料和粘接技术,混合复合陶瓷和一步法粘接剂的失败率分别比长石瓷和多步法粘接剂高 3.4 倍和 2.2 倍(p < 0.001)。使用氧阻断凝胶和 EVA 器械会使失败率比不使用时高 1.5-1.8 倍(p ≤ 0.001)。
在长达 15 年的时间内,全瓷冠的 AFR 仍然相当高。手术因素,但没有患者或牙齿水平的因素与失败显著相关。该研究已在德国临床试验注册处(DRKS-ID:DRKS00020271)注册。