A retrospective comparison of the survival of vital teeth adjacent to single, bounded edentulous spaces rehabilitated using implant-supported, resin-bonded, and conventional fixed dental prostheses

Shun Okuni; Kenji Maekawa; Takuya Mino; Yoko Kurosaki; Takuo Kuboki

doi:10.1016/j.jdent.2021.103911

A retrospective comparison of the survival of vital teeth adjacent to single, bounded edentulous spaces rehabilitated using implant-supported, resin-bonded, and conventional fixed dental prostheses

J Dent. 2022 Jan:116:103911. doi: 10.1016/j.jdent.2021.103911. Epub 2021 Dec 3.

Authors

Shun Okuni¹, Kenji Maekawa², Takuya Mino¹, Yoko Kurosaki³, Takuo Kuboki¹

Affiliations

¹ Department of Oral Rehabilitation and Regenerative Medicine, Okayama University Graduate School of Medicine, Dentistry, and Pharmaceutical Sciences, Japan.
² Department of Oral Rehabilitation and Regenerative Medicine, Okayama University Graduate School of Medicine, Dentistry, and Pharmaceutical Sciences, Japan. Electronic address: maekawa@md.okayama-u.ac.jp.
³ Center for Innovative Clinical Medicine, Okayama University Hospital, Japan.

PMID: 34864137
DOI: 10.1016/j.jdent.2021.103911

Abstract

Objectives: In this study, we aimed to compare the long-term survival of vital teeth adjacent to bounded edentulous spaces rehabilitated using an implant-supported prosthesis (ISP), a resin-bonded fixed partial denture (RBFPD), or a conventional fixed partial denture (CFPD). The risk factors for complications in teeth adjacent to the edentulous space (TAES) were also investigated.

Methods: We followed-up a consecutive series of 514 patients who underwent rehabilitation of a single bounded edentulous space with vital TAES (ISP: 103; RBFPD: 216; and CFPD: 195) from 2008 to 2017. Cumulative survival rates of prosthesis and TAES, and complication-free rates of TAES, were evaluated using the Kaplan-Meier analysis and log-rank test. Risk factors were evaluated using a Cox proportional hazards model.

Results: Cumulative complication-free rates of TAES showed no significant differences among the three groups. The cumulative survival rate of TAES in CFPD was significantly lower than that of ISP (p = 0.037); no significant differences were observed between ISP and RBFPD (p = 0.513), and RBFPD and CFPD (p = 0.076). Older age (p = 0.027) was the only independent significant risk factor for complications in TAES. Installation of CFPD (p = 0.019), ceramic prosthesis in edentulous space (p = 0.026), and deeper periodontal probing depth (p = 0.018) of TAES were significant risk factors for non-surviving TAES.

Conclusions: Rehabilitating a single bounded edentulous space with CFPD could increase the risk for TAES loss compared with ISP. Risk of TAES loss remained similar between ISP and RBFPD, which can minimize the loss of coronal tooth structure during tooth preparation.

Clinical significance: Teeth adjacent to edentulous space show equivalent longevity when rehabilitating a single bounded edentulous space with resin-bonded fixed partial dentures or single standing implant-supported prosthesis, at least 10 years post-installation.

Keywords: Implant; Pulp vitality; Resin bonded fixed partial denture; Survival; Teeth adjacent to edentulism.

MeSH terms

Dental Implants*
Dental Prosthesis, Implant-Supported / adverse effects
Dental Restoration Failure
Denture, Partial, Fixed / adverse effects
Denture, Partial, Fixed, Resin-Bonded*
Follow-Up Studies
Humans
Mouth, Edentulous*
Retrospective Studies
Tooth*

Substances

Dental Implants