This double-blind randomized controlled trial with a crossover design analyzed the technical and clinical performance of three-unit monolithic ZrO2 implant-fixed dental prostheses (iFDPs), prepared using two complete digital workflows (Test-1, Test-2) and one mixed analog–digital workflow (Control). Each of the 20 study patients received three iFDPs, resulting in 60 restorations for analysis. The quality of the restorations was assessed by analyzing laboratory cross-mounting and calculating the chairside adjustment time required during fitting. All iFDPs could be produced successfully with all three workflows. The highest cross-mounting success rate was observed for the original pairing iFDP/model of the Control group. Overall, 60% of iFDPs prepared with Test-1 workflow did not require chairside adjustment compared with 50% for Test-2 and 30% for Controls. The mean total chairside adjustment time, as the sum of interproximal, pontic, and occlusal corrections was 2.59 ± 2.51 min (Control), 2.88 ± 2.86 min (Test-1), and 3.87 ± 3.02 min (Test-2). All tested workflows were feasible for treatment with iFDPs in posterior sites on a soft tissue level type implant system. For clinical routine, it has to be considered that chairside adjustments may be necessary, at least in every second patient, independent on the workflow used.

Gintaute, A., Weber, K., Zitzmann, N.U., Bragger, U., Ferrari, M., Joda, T. (2021). A double-blind crossover rct analyzing technical and clinical performance of monolithic zro2 implant fixed dental prostheses (Ifdp) in three different digital workflows. JOURNAL OF CLINICAL MEDICINE, 10(12), 10 [10.3390/jcm10122661].

A double-blind crossover rct analyzing technical and clinical performance of monolithic zro2 implant fixed dental prostheses (Ifdp) in three different digital workflows

Ferrari M.;
2021-01-01

Abstract

This double-blind randomized controlled trial with a crossover design analyzed the technical and clinical performance of three-unit monolithic ZrO2 implant-fixed dental prostheses (iFDPs), prepared using two complete digital workflows (Test-1, Test-2) and one mixed analog–digital workflow (Control). Each of the 20 study patients received three iFDPs, resulting in 60 restorations for analysis. The quality of the restorations was assessed by analyzing laboratory cross-mounting and calculating the chairside adjustment time required during fitting. All iFDPs could be produced successfully with all three workflows. The highest cross-mounting success rate was observed for the original pairing iFDP/model of the Control group. Overall, 60% of iFDPs prepared with Test-1 workflow did not require chairside adjustment compared with 50% for Test-2 and 30% for Controls. The mean total chairside adjustment time, as the sum of interproximal, pontic, and occlusal corrections was 2.59 ± 2.51 min (Control), 2.88 ± 2.86 min (Test-1), and 3.87 ± 3.02 min (Test-2). All tested workflows were feasible for treatment with iFDPs in posterior sites on a soft tissue level type implant system. For clinical routine, it has to be considered that chairside adjustments may be necessary, at least in every second patient, independent on the workflow used.
2021
Gintaute, A., Weber, K., Zitzmann, N.U., Bragger, U., Ferrari, M., Joda, T. (2021). A double-blind crossover rct analyzing technical and clinical performance of monolithic zro2 implant fixed dental prostheses (Ifdp) in three different digital workflows. JOURNAL OF CLINICAL MEDICINE, 10(12), 10 [10.3390/jcm10122661].
File in questo prodotto:
File Dimensione Formato  
A Double-Blind Crossover RCT-Ferrari-2021.pdf

accesso aperto

Descrizione: Articolo
Tipologia: PDF editoriale
Licenza: Creative commons
Dimensione 1.35 MB
Formato Adobe PDF
1.35 MB Adobe PDF Visualizza/Apri

I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.

Utilizza questo identificativo per citare o creare un link a questo documento: https://hdl.handle.net/11365/1280676