Evaluating the Impact of Prosthetic Material Choices on the Clinical Outcomes of Implant-Supported Restorations.

Autor:	Patil VV; Department of Prosthodontics, Vasantdada Patil Dental College, Sangli, Maharashtra, India., S S; Department of Dentistry, ESIC PGIMSR, Bengaluru, Karnataka, India., Vathare AS; Department of Prosthodontics, Vasantdada Patil Dental College, Sangli, Maharashtra, India., Desai H; General Dentist, Boston University Henry M Goldman School of Dental Medicine, Boston, USA., Dewan H; Department of Prosthetic Dental Sciences, College of Dentistry, Jazan University, Jazan, Kingdom of Saudi Arabia., Yekula PS; Department of Prosthodontics and Implantology, Sibar Institute of Dental Sciences, Guntur, Andhra Pradesh, India., Sutariya SI; Narsinhbhai Patel Dental College and Hospital, Sankalchand Patel University, Visnagar, Gujarat, India.
Jazyk:	angličtina
Zdroj:	Journal of pharmacy & bioallied sciences [J Pharm Bioallied Sci] 2024 Jul; Vol. 16 (Suppl 3), pp. S2752-S2754. Date of Electronic Publication: 2024 Jul 31.
DOI:	10.4103/jpbs.jpbs_372_24
Abstrakt:	Background: By resolving the difficulties associated with missing teeth, implant-supported restorations have emerged as a key component of contemporary dentistry. The choice of prosthetic materials is crucial in establishing the durability and clinical efficacy of these restorations. Methods: A prospective design was used at a tertiary care hospital with 150 patients receiving implant-supported restorations. Depending on which of the three prosthetic materials were utilized for their prosthesis-ceramic, metal, or polymer-the patients were randomized into one of three groups. Clinical assessments were carried out at baseline and at regular intervals for a minimum follow-up period of [insert time]. These evaluations included implant stability, peri-implant health, restorative integrity, patient satisfaction, and maintenance needs. Results: When compared to metal and polymer alternatives, ceramic restorations showed superior implant stability (75.2 ± 3.6 N cm), peri-implant health (1.8 ± 0.4), and restoration integrity (92%). Ceramic restorations had the greatest patient satisfaction ratings (8.5 ± 1.2), but there was no statistically significant difference between the material groups. Restorations made of polymers showed the greatest maintenance requirements (2.0 ± 0.9). Conclusion: The choice of prosthetic material has a major impact on how well implant-supported restorations function clinically. Ceramic restorations performed better in terms of restoration quality, peri-implant health, and implant stability, demonstrating their appropriateness for producing positive long-term outcomes. Competing Interests: There are no conflicts of interest. (Copyright: © 2024 Journal of Pharmacy and Bioallied Sciences.)
Databáze:	MEDLINE
Externí odkaz:	Zobrazit plný text záznamu