4.6 Article

An 8-year prospective clinical investigation on the survival rate of feldspathic veneers: Influence of occlusal splint in patients with bruxism

Journal

JOURNAL OF DENTISTRY
Volume 99, Issue -, Pages -

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.jdent.2020.103352

Keywords

Bruxism; Ceramics; Feldspathic ceramic; Fracture; Occlusal Splint; Surface treatment

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Objectives: The aim of this study was to perform a 8-year prospective clinical investigation on the survival rate of feldspathic ceramic veneers, as well as analyse the influence of the occlusal splint in patients with parafunctional bruxism. Methods: Three hundred and sixty-four veneers fabricated using conventional feldspathic ceramic were provided in 64 patients. The patient sample included 40 individuals with bruxism. During the follow-up period, the effect of wearing the occlusal splint on the incidence of failure (fracture and/or debonding) in patients with bruxism was also assessed. The survival rate of veneers was determined using the Kaplan-Meier estimator. Statistical significance was set at p < 0.05 with a confidence interval of 95%. Results: The occurrence of fracture for the feldspathic veneers tested in this study was 7.7%, while only 1.9% of the total number of veneers debonded. The overall survival rate was 93.7% after 3 years, 91% after 5 years, and 87.1% after 8 years. Patients with bruxism using an occlusal splint showed a survival rate of 89.1% after 7 years, while the survival rate in patients with bruxism using no occlusal splint was 63.9% (p < 0.05). Conclusion: This study confirmed that feldspathic veneers may represent a suitable clinical solution for indirect aesthetic restorations. Such a treatment may be an option also for those patients affected by bruxism, as long as they regularly wear an occlusal splint. However, patients with bruxism using no occlusal splint may still present a potential high-risk of failure and/or debonding.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available