M Miettinen1, B J Millar. 1. Restorative Dentistry, King's College London, Primary Care Dentistry, King's College London Dental Institute at Guy's, King's College & St. Thomas' Hospitals, Bessemer Road, London, SE5 9RW, UK.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: This literature review was designed to assess and compare the success rates and modes of failure of metal-framed, fibre-reinforced composite and all-ceramic resin-bonded bridges. MATERIALS AND METHOD: A Medline search (Ovid), supplemented by hand searching, was conducted to identify prospective and retrospective cohort studies on different resin-bonded bridges within the last 16 years. A total of 49 studies met the pre-set inclusion criteria. Success rates of 25 studies on metal-framed, 17 studies on fibre-reinforced composite and 7 studies on all-ceramic resin-bonded bridges were analysed and characteristics of failures were identified. RESULTS: The analysis of the studies indicated an estimation of annual failure rates per year to be 4.6% (±1.3%, 95% CI) for metal-framed, 4.1% (±2.1%, 95% CI) for fibre-reinforced and 11.7% (±1.8%, 95% CI) for all-ceramic resin-bonded bridges. The most frequent complications were: debonding for metal-framed, resin-bonded bridges (93% of all failures); delamination of the composite veneering material for the fibre-reinforced bridges (41%) and fracture of the framework for the all-ceramic bridges (57%). CONCLUSIONS: All types of resin-bonded bridges provide an effective short- to medium-term option, with all-ceramic performing least well and having the least favourable mode of failure. The methods of failures were different for different bridges with metal frameworks performing the best over time.
OBJECTIVES: This literature review was designed to assess and compare the success rates and modes of failure of metal-framed, fibre-reinforced composite and all-ceramic resin-bonded bridges. MATERIALS AND METHOD: A Medline search (Ovid), supplemented by hand searching, was conducted to identify prospective and retrospective cohort studies on different resin-bonded bridges within the last 16 years. A total of 49 studies met the pre-set inclusion criteria. Success rates of 25 studies on metal-framed, 17 studies on fibre-reinforced composite and 7 studies on all-ceramic resin-bonded bridges were analysed and characteristics of failures were identified. RESULTS: The analysis of the studies indicated an estimation of annual failure rates per year to be 4.6% (±1.3%, 95% CI) for metal-framed, 4.1% (±2.1%, 95% CI) for fibre-reinforced and 11.7% (±1.8%, 95% CI) for all-ceramic resin-bonded bridges. The most frequent complications were: debonding for metal-framed, resin-bonded bridges (93% of all failures); delamination of the composite veneering material for the fibre-reinforced bridges (41%) and fracture of the framework for the all-ceramic bridges (57%). CONCLUSIONS: All types of resin-bonded bridges provide an effective short- to medium-term option, with all-ceramic performing least well and having the least favourable mode of failure. The methods of failures were different for different bridges with metal frameworks performing the best over time.