...
  • 主题
高级搜索  >
历史搜索 清空历史
首页> 外文期刊>Journal of oral rehabilitation >A systematic review and meta‐analysis of 3‐unit fixed dental prostheses: Are the results of 2 abutment implants comparable to the results of 2 abutment teeth?
【24h】

A systematic review and meta‐analysis of 3‐unit fixed dental prostheses: Are the results of 2 abutment implants comparable to the results of 2 abutment teeth?

机译：3单元固定牙科假肢的系统评价和荟萃分析：2位邻接植入物的结果与2个邻接牙齿的结果相当吗？

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           
页面导航
  • 摘要
  • 著录项
  • 相似文献
  • 相关主题

摘要

Summary The purpose of the systematic review and meta‐analysis was to compare the performance of 3‐unit bridges on teeth with 3‐unit bridges on implants, evaluating survival of the bridges, survival of the teeth or implants, condition of the hard and soft tissues surrounding the supports, complications and patient‐reported outcome measures (PROM) after a mean observation period of at least 1?year. A literature search was conducted using a combination of the search terms: fixed partial denture and fixed dental prostheses (FDPs). An electronic search for data published until January 2017 was undertaken using the MEDLINE, EMBASE and Cochrane Library databases. Eligibility criteria included clinical human studies, either randomised or not, interventional or observational, which evaluated the results of 3‐unit FDPs on either 2 implants or 2 abutment teeth. The search identified 1686 unique references. After applying eligibility criteria, 66 articles were included in the analysis. A total of 1973 3‐unit FDP s were supported by teeth, and 765 were implant‐supported. No significant differences were found either in the survival of the supporting abutments ( P? =?.52; 99% vs 98.7% survival per year) or in the survival of the prostheses ( P? =?.34; 96.4% vs 97.4% survival per year). Both treatments show an almost equally low complication rate, but there is a low level of reporting of hard and soft tissue conditions and PROM. It is concluded that implant‐supported 3‐unit FDP s seem to be a reliable treatment with survival rates not significantly different from the results of teeth‐supported 3‐unit FDP s.
机译：总结系统审查和荟萃分析的目的是将3单元桥梁的牙齿上的3单元桥梁的性能进行比较，在植入物上，评估桥梁的存活，牙齿或植入物的存活，难以和柔软的条件在平均观察期至少为1年的情况下围绕的组织，并发症和患者报告的结果措施（PROM）。使用搜索项的组合进行文献搜索：固定部分义齿和固定牙科假肢（FDP）。使用Medline，Embase和Cochrane库数据库进行到2017年1月之前发布的电子搜索。资格标准包括临床人类研究，无论是随机的，介入的还是观察，它在2种植体或2个邻接牙齿上评估了3单元FDP的结果。搜索确定了1686个唯一的参考。申请资格标准后，分析中包含66篇文章。通过牙齿支撑了总共1973个3单元FDP S，植入植入765个。在支撑基台的存活中没有发现显着差异（P？= 52;每年存活99％的98.7％）或在假体存（p？= 34; 34; 96.4％与97.4％的生存期每年生存）。这两种治疗均显示出几乎同样的并发症率，但报告硬度和软组织条件和PROM的报告较低。结论是，植入物支持的3单元FDP S似乎是一种可靠的治疗，其存活率与齿支持的3单元FDP S的结果没有显着不同。

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