Biswal Sarojini, Yadav Bhupender Kumar, Nagpal Abhishek, Shetty Omkar Krishna, Ritwal Pankaj, Kapoor Shalini
Department of Prosthodontics, Faculty of Dental Sciences, SGT University, Chandu Budhera, Gurugram, Haryana, India.
Leixir Dental Laboratory Group, Gurugram, Haryana, India.
J Indian Prosthodont Soc. 2025 Apr 1;25(2):150-162. doi: 10.4103/jips.jips_331_24. Epub 2025 Apr 11.
The aim of the study was to investigate and compare the prosthetic parameters, clinical indices, and survival rates of two digitally fabricated extracoronal restorations, namely an onlay and a full crown, at baseline, 1 year, and 2 years.
This was a prospective clinical study conducted on endodontically treated posterior teeth.
Endodontically treated posterior teeth (n = 15) present bilaterally in the mandibular arch were selected. Digitally fabricated lithium disilicate onlay and crown were placed on either side of the same arch after randomization. Clinical parameters and prosthetic characteristics (as per the modified United States Public Health Service criteria) were evaluated at baseline, 1-year, and 2-year follow-ups.
Data were descriptively examined. The results were evaluated using the Chi-square test and ANOVA. Statistical significance was determined at P < 0.05.
Full crowns showed a 100% survival rate, while onlays had an 83.3% survival rate, with a significant difference (P = 0.030, 95% confidence interval: 0.01-0.12). Onlays exhibited significantly better periodontal outcomes, including lower bleeding on probing (P = 0.000), plaque index (P = 0.001), and probing pocket depth (P = 0.000) at 1 and 2 years. Marginal discoloration (20%) and marginal integrity loss (13.3%) were observed in onlays, with significant differences (P = 0.001). Both groups showed no fractures, secondary caries, or significant surface texture changes, and 100% patient satisfaction throughout.
In this clinical trial comparing lithium disilicate onlays and crowns for restoring posterior teeth following endodontic treatment, both options demonstrated satisfactory prosthetic parameters during subsequent follow-ups. However, marginal integrity and discoloration were more prevalent in the onlay group. Periodontal examination revealed that onlays exhibited superior periodontal outcomes compared to crowns, with full crowns showing greater periodontal damage at 1-year and 2-year follow-ups.
本研究旨在调查和比较两种数字化制作的冠外修复体（即嵌体和全冠）在基线、1年和2年时的修复参数、临床指标及生存率。
这是一项针对根管治疗后牙的前瞻性临床研究。
选取下颌牙弓双侧存在的根管治疗后牙（n = 15）。随机化后，将数字化制作的二硅酸锂嵌体和全冠分别置于同一牙弓的两侧。在基线、1年和2年随访时评估临床参数和修复特征（按照美国公共卫生服务标准修订版）。
对数据进行描述性检验。结果采用卡方检验和方差分析进行评估。P < 0.05时确定具有统计学意义。
全冠的生存率为100%，而嵌体的生存率为83.3%，差异有统计学意义（P = 0.030，95%置信区间：0.01 - 0.12）。在1年和2年时，嵌体的牙周结局明显更好，包括探诊出血（P = 0.000）、菌斑指数（P = 0.001）和探诊袋深度（P = 0.000）更低。嵌体出现边缘变色（20%）和边缘完整性丧失（13.3%），差异有统计学意义（P = 0.001）。两组均未出现骨折及继发龋，表面质地也无明显变化，患者满意度均为100%。
在这项比较二硅酸锂嵌体和全冠用于根管治疗后牙修复的临床试验中，两种修复体在后续随访中均显示出令人满意的修复参数。然而，嵌体组边缘完整性和变色更为普遍。牙周检查显示，与全冠相比，嵌体的牙周结局更佳，全冠在1年和2年随访时显示出更大的牙周损害。
