Chinese Journal of Tissue Engineering Research ›› 2012, Vol. 16 ›› Issue (47): 8787-8793.doi: 10.3969/j.issn.2095-4344.2012.47.011

Previous Articles     Next Articles

Clinical application of different posterior fixed bridge materials

Yao Xi1, Li Yun-sheng1, Xie Lei2, Dai Yong-yu2   

  1. 1Department of Stomatology, China Meitan General Hospital, Beijing 100028, China
    2Department of Stomatology, Beijing Hospital of Health Department, Beijing 100730, China
  • Received:2012-08-19 Revised:2012-09-17 Online:2012-11-18 Published:2013-03-15
  • Contact: Li Yun-sheng, Master, Associate chief physician, Department of Stomatology, China Meitan General Hospital, Beijing 100028, China lysegl@163.com
  • About author:Yao Xi★, Master, Attending physician, Department of Stomatology, China Meitan General Hospital, Beijing 100028, China yaoxi_heather@163.com

PDF

648

Abstract:

BACKGROUND: Studies have shown that zirconia alloy ceramic crowns, gold-platinum alloy ceramic crowns and nickel-chromium alloy ceramic crown have certain strengths and weaknesses, so there is a controversy on the selection of the materials applied to the posterior tooth fixed restoration.
OBJECTIVE: To compare the clinical effect of Lava zirconia fixed bridge, goal-platinum alloy ceramic fixed bridge and nickel-chromium alloy ceramic fixed bridge supplemented by fiber posts and resin core used in the posterior column defects.
METHODS: 120 patients with mandibular first molar missing were treated with Lava zirconia, goal-platinum alloy ceramic and nickel-chromium alloy ceramic fixed bridge supplemented by fiber posts and resin core for posterior column defects. The restorative effects of three prostheses were compared.
RESULTS AND CONCLUSION: Clinical indicators of test results of 6-48 months follow-up showed that the gingival edge coloring, gingival margin microleakage, the color of prosthesis and the caries around prosthesis of Lava zirconia alloy ceramic crowns and gold-platinum alloy ceramic crowns were better than those of nickel-chromium alloy ceramic crowns, and the gingival edge coloring and the color of prosthesis of Lava zirconia alloy ceramic crowns were better than those of gold-platinum alloy ceramic crowns, while the gingival margin microleakage of gold-platinum alloy ceramic crowns was better than that of Lava zirconia alloy ceramic crowns. Nickel-chromium alloy ceramic crowns were lower than Lava zirconia ceramic crowns and gold-platinum alloy ceramic crowns in the fracture extent. Gingival index clinical examination showed that Nickel-chromium alloy ceramic crowns had the highest gingival index and the worst gingival healthy condition among the three kinds of prosthesis. There was no significant difference of the indicators above between Lava zirconia alloy ceramic crowns and gold-platinum alloy ceramic crowns, So, the Lava zirconia ceramic crowns and the gold-platinum alloy ceramic crowns were ideal prosthesis during the choice of the types of posterior fixed bridge prosthesis. Meanwhile, the first one was better than the last one in biocompatibility, and the last one was better than the first one in the marginal adaptation.

CLC Number: