ArticleClinical oral investigations2024
Mid-term survival and complications of double-crown-retained removable dental prostheses placed in the dental practice - a retrospective study.
Article in Clinical oral investigations, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Clinical performance of a conometric retention system for single implant restorations: 1-year analysis of a prospective multicenter study.International journal of implant dentistry · 2026Article
- Up to 30 years of clinical performance of double-crown-retained removable dental prostheses with spark-eroded friction pins placed in a general dental practice.Clinical oral investigations · 2026Article
- Clinical Performance and Survival of Adhesive Attachments for Removable Partial Dentures: A Systematic Review.Dentistry journal · 2026Review
- Conical Telescopic Overdenture in Geriatric with Weak Upper Extremities: A Rare Case Report.Contemporary clinical dentistryArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesClinical data on the performance of double-crown-retained removable dental prostheses (dcRDPs), especially beyond university studies, are rare. The objective of this retrospective clinical study was to evaluate the survival and complication-freeness probabilities of dcRDPs and to identify risk factors for failure and complications in a dental practice setting. MATERIALS AND
methodsAnonymized practice data of 174 patients (56.9% female) fitted with a total of 213 dcRDPs (mean of 3.3 abutment teeth per dcRDP) were evaluated up to 11 years after prothesis placement (mean observation time of 3.9 years). Probabilities of survival and complication freeness were calculated on the prosthesis- and abutment level and visualized using the Kaplan-Meier method. Factors influencing failure and complications were computed using Cox regression analyses (R Ver. 7; alpha < 0.05).
resultsDuring our observation period, 39 (18%) of the dcRDPs failed. The mean (95% CI) overall survival was 94% (90-97%) after 2 years and 86% (80-92%) after 5 years. DcRDP survival correlated with lower patient age and more abutment teeth (P < 0.05), while other analyzed factors did not. The probability of absence of prosthesis-related complications was 92% after 2 years and 80% after 5 years. The probability of no technical complications of abutments (teeth/implants) was 85% after 2 years and 78% after 5 years, and the probability of no biological complications was 87% after 2 years and 72% after 5 years. In total, 141 dcRDPs (66.2%) faced at least one complication during the observation period.
conclusionsDouble-crown-retained prostheses fitted in a dental practice had acceptable mid-term survival rates and common technical and biological complications that were frequently easily manageable. However, prosthesis performance depended on the quality and number of abutment teeth/implants. Within the limitations of this retrospective analysis, the outcomes we observed in a dental practice are comparable to, albeit slightly worse than, those found in university studies. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Evaluation of the clinical performance of dcRDPs fitted in a dental practice is important to estimate durability and complication patterns in order to weigh treatment decisions.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.