The Journal of prosthetic dentistry · 2025
A completely digital workflow for PEEK removable partial dentures: A preliminary clinical study.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Ge Yongcheng, Zhao Ting, Fan Sizheng, Liu Pengyuan, Liu Prof Xiaoqiu
Аннотация
STATEMENT OF PROBLEM: The full-process digital polyetheretherketone (PEEK) removable partial denture (RPD) has the potential to significantly improve patient treatment comfort and work efficiency. However, a comparison of the fit, mastication efficiency, clinical efficacy, and patient satisfaction between completely digital and semidigital workflows for PEEK RPDs is needed to assess its benefits.
PURPOSE: The purpose of this preliminary clinical study was to compare the differences in the fit, mastication efficiency, clinical efficacy, and patient satisfaction between completely digital and semidigital workflows for PEEK RPDs.
MATERIAL AND METHODS: Twenty participants with partial edentulism were included in the study. Each received two types of RPD, one fabricated using a completely digital workflow and the other using a semidigital workflow. The completely digital group used intraoral scanning with a 3Shape scanner to obtain digital scans, followed by computer-aided design and computer-aided manufacturing (CAD-CAM) of the dentures. The semidigital group involved traditional polyvinyl siloxane (PVS) impressions, gypsum casts, and the subsequent CAD-CAM processing of the dentures. PVS was used to replicate the gap between the oral mucosa and the RPD baseplate tissue in both groups, and 3-dimensional (3D) deviation analysis was used for measurements. Mastication efficiency was measured using the absorbance method, and patient satisfaction was evaluated via a questionnaire. T tests were conducted to compare the fit, mastication efficiency, clinical efficacy, and patient satisfaction between the two groups (α=.05).
RESULTS: A significant difference in the fit was found between the baseplate tissue and oral mucosa at the distal extension of the RPD between the completely digital and semidigital PEEK RPDs (P=.038, P=.023), while no significant difference was observed at the nondistal extension end (P=.445, P=.331). No significant difference in mastication efficiency was found between the two groups (P=.448). The completely digital group reported higher comfort levels than the semidigital group (P<.001). No significant differences in overall denture satisfaction were found between the two groups at 1, 2, and 3 months after restoration (P=.730, P=.463, P=.526).
CONCLUSIONS: Both completely digital and semidigital workflows for PEEK RPDs achieve good fit. The completely digital PEEK RPD significantly enhances patient comfort and work efficiency, making it a suitable option for broader application.
PURPOSE: The purpose of this preliminary clinical study was to compare the differences in the fit, mastication efficiency, clinical efficacy, and patient satisfaction between completely digital and semidigital workflows for PEEK RPDs.
MATERIAL AND METHODS: Twenty participants with partial edentulism were included in the study. Each received two types of RPD, one fabricated using a completely digital workflow and the other using a semidigital workflow. The completely digital group used intraoral scanning with a 3Shape scanner to obtain digital scans, followed by computer-aided design and computer-aided manufacturing (CAD-CAM) of the dentures. The semidigital group involved traditional polyvinyl siloxane (PVS) impressions, gypsum casts, and the subsequent CAD-CAM processing of the dentures. PVS was used to replicate the gap between the oral mucosa and the RPD baseplate tissue in both groups, and 3-dimensional (3D) deviation analysis was used for measurements. Mastication efficiency was measured using the absorbance method, and patient satisfaction was evaluated via a questionnaire. T tests were conducted to compare the fit, mastication efficiency, clinical efficacy, and patient satisfaction between the two groups (α=.05).
RESULTS: A significant difference in the fit was found between the baseplate tissue and oral mucosa at the distal extension of the RPD between the completely digital and semidigital PEEK RPDs (P=.038, P=.023), while no significant difference was observed at the nondistal extension end (P=.445, P=.331). No significant difference in mastication efficiency was found between the two groups (P=.448). The completely digital group reported higher comfort levels than the semidigital group (P<.001). No significant differences in overall denture satisfaction were found between the two groups at 1, 2, and 3 months after restoration (P=.730, P=.463, P=.526).
CONCLUSIONS: Both completely digital and semidigital workflows for PEEK RPDs achieve good fit. The completely digital PEEK RPD significantly enhances patient comfort and work efficiency, making it a suitable option for broader application.