IADR Abstract Archives
Two-unit Molar Cantilevered RBBs Don't Tip – A Three-Year RCT
Objectives: Two-unit cantilevered (CL2), resin-bonded bridges (RBBs) have good success and survival rates for missing anterior teeth and premolars being comparable to conventional bridges. However, their use for molar-sized edentulous spans has traditionally been contraindicated. This RCT evaluates the longevity and qualitative outcomes of RBBs comparing CL2 and FM3 (three-unit fixed-movable) designs for missing molar spans (8-10 mm). This data updates interim findings of the randomized-controlled trial (Clinicaltrial.gov:NCT02239718).
Methods: Patients having one or more missing molars that met the inclusion/exclusion criteria (IRB:UW14-233) were recruited and randomized into CL2 or FM3 groups. Patients were examined by independent assessors at baseline and 1-,6-,12-,24- and 36-months after cementation. Data collected included: longevity and clinical outcomes; patient's satisfaction and oral health-related quality of life (14-item questionnaire and OHIP-49 respectively). Data were analyzed by log-rank and t-test.
Results: Seventy-eight patients received 92 RBBs (42 CL2 and 50 FM3). Seventy-three patients were reviewed at 1, 6 and 12 months, seventy-one at 24 months and fifty-two at 36 months. Prostheses were mostly provided by undergraduate dental students. Two CL2 and two FM3 RBBs debonded resulting in a retention proportion of 95.2% and 96.0% respectively. All except one CL2 RBB were successfully rebonded. Four patients experienced biological complications, including metal allergy (one) and irreversible pulpitis (one) in CL2 group and root fracture (two) in FM3 group resulting in success proportion of 90.5% (CL2) and 92.0% (FM3) and survival proportion 92.9% (CL2) and 95.2% (FM3). There was no statistically significant difference between CL2 and FM3 for success, survival, patient-reported outcome evaluations and OHIP-49 scores (p>0.05).
Conclusions: CL2 RBBs can be used for replacing single molar spans with minimal observable complications up to 36 months. This challenges current prosthodontic dogma. Longer term data is being collected.
Grant UGC:17100314
Methods: Patients having one or more missing molars that met the inclusion/exclusion criteria (IRB:UW14-233) were recruited and randomized into CL2 or FM3 groups. Patients were examined by independent assessors at baseline and 1-,6-,12-,24- and 36-months after cementation. Data collected included: longevity and clinical outcomes; patient's satisfaction and oral health-related quality of life (14-item questionnaire and OHIP-49 respectively). Data were analyzed by log-rank and t-test.
Results: Seventy-eight patients received 92 RBBs (42 CL2 and 50 FM3). Seventy-three patients were reviewed at 1, 6 and 12 months, seventy-one at 24 months and fifty-two at 36 months. Prostheses were mostly provided by undergraduate dental students. Two CL2 and two FM3 RBBs debonded resulting in a retention proportion of 95.2% and 96.0% respectively. All except one CL2 RBB were successfully rebonded. Four patients experienced biological complications, including metal allergy (one) and irreversible pulpitis (one) in CL2 group and root fracture (two) in FM3 group resulting in success proportion of 90.5% (CL2) and 92.0% (FM3) and survival proportion 92.9% (CL2) and 95.2% (FM3). There was no statistically significant difference between CL2 and FM3 for success, survival, patient-reported outcome evaluations and OHIP-49 scores (p>0.05).
Conclusions: CL2 RBBs can be used for replacing single molar spans with minimal observable complications up to 36 months. This challenges current prosthodontic dogma. Longer term data is being collected.
Grant UGC:17100314