MARATTO

article · Egyptian Dental Journal /Egyptian Dental Journal

PEEK Versus Metallic Framework For Extracoronal Attachment Mandibular Bilateral Distally Extended Removable Dental Prosthesis (RDP) Evaluation of Abutments Bone Height Changes and Patient Satisfaction. A Randomized Clinical Trial.

20226 citationsOpen accessKafr el-Sheikh University

Abstract

Purpose: to evaluate bone height changes around distal abutments (canines) with two different framework materials for extracoronal attachment mandibular bilateral distally extended removable dental prosthesis (RDP) and compare patient satisfaction . Materials and methods: Twenty-eight mandibular Kennedy class I partially edentulous patients with remaining 6 anterior teeth were selected. For all patients splinting of remaining anterior abutments by porcelain fused to metal crowns, the RDP frameworks were designed by CAD and printed into 3-D resin pattern. The patients were randomly divided into two groups. Patients in group I received extracoronal attachment RDP framework fabricated from milled BioHPP PEEK while patients in group II received extracoronal attachment RDP framework fabricated from Cobalt -Chromium (Co-Cr) material. Digital radiography was used for vertical bone loss (VBL) assessment around canines at insertion, 6 and 12 months. Patient satisfaction was measured after 6 months using visual analog scale (VAS). Statistical analysis was done by t-test and Mann-Whitney. Results: VBL significantly increased from T6 to T12 for both groups where (p=0.038 and 0.021) for PEEK and Co-Cr framework respectively. there was a significant difference in VBL between two groups at T12 only (p=0.012) where Co-Cr framework recorded significant higher VBL at T12 than PEEK. As for patients satisfaction, patients who received PEEK RDP frameworks were more satisfied as regards esthetic and comfort than patients who received Co-Cr RDP frameworks Conclusion: Extracoronal attachment RDPs with PEEK frameworks showed less VBL than those with Co-Cr frameworks. Patients with PEEK frameworks were more satisfied than patients with Co-Cr frameworks

Research topics

  • Dental Implant Techniques and Outcomes
  • Periodontal Regeneration and Treatments
  • Reconstructive Surgery and Microvascular Techniques

Read the original research

This page summarises published work. The authoritative version sits with the publisher.

DOI: 10.21608/edj.2021.93903.1778

Is something wrong with this record? Report it or request removal.

Discussion

Discuss this research

Have you built on this work, tried to replicate it, or seen it applied in practice? Share what you know. Verified researchers and MARATTO™ domain experts can open a discussion, and any member can reply. Contributions are reviewed before they appear.

No discussion yet. Open the first thread.