Mid-term survival and complications of double-crown-retained removable dental prostheses placed in the dental practice - a retrospective study.

Publisher: Springer-Verlag Country of Publication: Germany NLM ID: 9707115 Publication Model: Electronic Cited Medium: Internet ISSN: 1436-3771 (Electronic) Linking ISSN: 14326981 NLM ISO Abbreviation: Clin Oral Investig Subsets: MEDLINE

Publication: Berlin : Springer-Verlag
Original Publication: Berlin : Springer, c1997-

Crowns* ; Dental Restoration Failure* ; Denture, Partial, Removable*; Humans ; Retrospective Studies ; Female ; Male ; Middle Aged ; Adult ; Aged ; Risk Factors ; Dental Abutments ; Aged, 80 and over

Objectives: Clinical 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 Methods: Anonymized 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).
Results: During 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.
Conclusions: Double-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.
Competing Interests: Declarations. Ethics approval and consent to participate: All procedures performed in this study involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and/or national committee and with the 1964 Declaration of Helsinki and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards. This retrospective study used anonymized patient data. Informed consent of participants was therefore not applicable. The local review board of the University of Heidelberg (no. S-136/2023) approved this study. Consent for publication: The manuscript has been read and approved by all the authors. All authors gave consent for publication. Competing interests: The authors declare no competing interests.
(© 2024. The Author(s).)

Jordan RA, Bodechtel C, Hertrampf K, Hoffmann T, Kocher T, Nitschke I, Schiffner U, Stark H, Zimmer S, Micheelis, DMS V Surveillance Investigators’ Group (2014) The Fifth German Oral Health Study (Fünfte Deutsche Mundgesundheitsstudie, DMS V) - rationale, design, and methods. BMC Oral Health 29(14):61.  https://doi.org/10.1186/1472-6831-14-161.
Verma R, Joda T, Brägger U, Wittneben JG (2013) A systematic review of the clinical performance of tooth-retained and implant-retained double crown prostheses with a follow-up of 3 years. J Prosthodont 22:2–12. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1532-849X.2012.00905.x. (PMID: 10.1111/j.1532-849X.2012.00905.x22947104)
Yoshino K, Ito K, Kuroda M, Sugihara N (2020) Survival rate of removable partial dentures with complete arch reconstruction using double crowns: a retrospective study. Clin Oral Investig 24:1543–1549. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00784-019-03030-8. (PMID: 10.1007/s00784-019-03030-831352518)
Hinz S, Bömicke W, Schweyen R, Bensel T (2023) Ten-year clinical performance of non-precious metal double crowns with friction pins in severely reduced dentitions-a retrospective study. Clin Oral Investig 27:1623–1635. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00784-022-04788-0. (PMID: 10.1007/s00784-022-04788-036414766)
Hakkoum MA, Wazir G (2018) Telescopic Denture. Open. Dent J 30:246–254. https://doi.org/10.2174/1874210601812010246. (PMID: 10.2174/1874210601812010246)
Hultén J, Tillström B, Nilner K (1993) Long term clinical evaluation of conical crown retained dentures. Swed Dent J 17:225–234. (PMID: 8134891)
Wenz HJ, Lehmann KM (1998) A telescopic crown concept for the restoration of the partially edentulous arch: the Marburg double crown system. Int J Prosthodont 11:541–550. (PMID: 10023216)
Wenz HJ, Hertrampf K, Lehmann KM (2021) Clinical longevity of removable partial dentures retained by telescopic crowns: outcome of the double crown with clearance fit. Int J Prosthodont 14:207–213.
Naumann M, Ernst J, Reich S, Weißhaupt P, Beuer F (2011) Galvano- vs. metal-ceramic crowns: up to 5-year results of a randomised split-mouth study. Clin Oral Investig 15:657–660. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00784-010-0429-3. (PMID: 10.1007/s00784-010-0429-320499117)
Rinke S, Buergers R, Ziebolz D, Roediger M (2015) Clinical outcome of double crown-retained implant overdentures with zirconia primary crowns. J Adv Prosthodont 7:329–337. https://doi.org/10.4047/jap.2015.7.4.329. (PMID: 10.4047/jap.2015.7.4.329263309814551790)
Özyemişci-Cebeci N, Yavuzyilmaz H (2013) Comparison of the effects of friction varnish and electroforming on the retention of telescopic crowns. J Prosthet Dent 109:392–396. (PMID: 10.1016/S0022-3913(13)60325-X23763784)
Seo JG, Cho JH (2020) Clinical outcomes of rigid and non-rigid telescopic double-crown-retained removable dental prostheses: An analytical review. J Adv Prosthodont 12:38–48. https://doi.org/10.4047/jap.2020.12.1.38. (PMID: 10.4047/jap.2020.12.1.38321280857040448)
Schwindling FS, Dittmann B, Rammelsberg P (2014) Double-crown-retained removable dental prostheses: a retrospective study of survival and complications. J Prosthet Dent 112:488–493. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.prosdent.2014.02.017. (PMID: 10.1016/j.prosdent.2014.02.01724831747)
Hofmann E, Behr M, Handel G (2002) Frequency and costs of technical failures of clasp- and double crown-retained removable partial dentures. Clin Oral Investig 2002(6):104–108. (PMID: 10.1007/s00784-002-0160-9)
Moldovan O, Rudolph H, Luthardt RG (2018) Biological complications of removable dental prostheses in the moderately reduced dentition: a systematic literature review. Clin Oral Investig 22:2439–2461. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00784-018-2522-y. (PMID: 10.1007/s00784-018-2522-y29959596)
Schwarz S, Bernhart G, Hassel AJ, Rammelsberg P (2014) Survival of double-crown-retained dentures either tooth-implant or solely implant-supported: an 8-year retrospective study. Clinical Implant Dent Relat Res 16:618–625. (PMID: 10.1111/cid.12023)
Fobbe H, Rammelsberg P, Lorenzo Bermejo J, Kappel S (2019) The up-to-11-year survival and success of implants and abutment teeth under solely implant-supported and combined tooth-implant-supported double crown-retained removable dentures. Clin Oral Implants Res 30:1134–1141. (PMID: 10.1111/clr.1352731444828)
Klotz AL, Fobbe H, Rammelsberg P, Lorenzo Bermejo J, Kappel S (2021) Survival and success of tooth-implant-supported and solely implant-supported double-crown-retained overdentures: A prospective study over a period of up to 11 years. Clin Oral Implants Res 32:1425–1432. https://doi.org/10.1111/clr.13842. (PMID: 10.1111/clr.1384234543479)
Bernhart G, Koob A, Schmitter M, Gabbert O, Stober T, Rammelsberg P (2021) Clinical success of implant-supported and tooth–implant-supported double crown-retained dentures. Clin Oral Invest 16:1031–1037. (PMID: 10.1007/s00784-011-0592-1)
Krennmair G, Krainhöfner M, Waldenberger O (2007) Dental implants as strategic supplementary abutments for implant-tooth-supported telescopic crown-retained maxillary dentures: a retrospective follow-up study for up to 9 years. Int J Prosthodont 20:617–622. (PMID: 18069371)
Lian M, Zhao K, Feng Y, Yao Q (2018) Prognosis of combining remaining teeth and implants in double-crown-retained removable dental prostheses: Asystematic review and meta-analysis. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 33:281–297. https://doi.org/10.11607/jomi.5796. (PMID: 10.11607/jomi.579628938029)
Rammelsberg P, Bernhart G, Lorenzo Bermejo J, Schmitter M, Schwarz S (2014) Prognosis of implants and abutment teeth under combined tooth-implant-supported and solely implant-supported double-crown-retained removable dental prostheses. Clin Oral Implants Res 25:813–818. https://doi.org/10.1111/clr.12197. (PMID: 10.1111/clr.1219723730776)
Weischer T, Mohr C (2001) Implant-supported mandibular telescopic prostheses in oral cancer patients: an up to 9-year retrospective study. Int J Prosthodont 14:329–334. (PMID: 11508087)
Zou D, Wu Y, Huang W, Zhang Z (2013) A 5- to 8-year retrospective study comparing the clinical results of implant-supported telescopic crown versus bar overdentures in patients with edentulous maxillae. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 28:1322–1330. https://doi.org/10.11607/jomi.3100. (PMID: 10.11607/jomi.310024066324)
Frisch E, Ziebolz D, Ratka-Kruger P, Rinke S (2015) Double crown-retained maxillary overdentures: 5-year follow-up. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res 17:22–31. https://doi.org/10.1111/cid.12087. (PMID: 10.1111/cid.1208723679159)
Wöstmann B, Balkenhol M, Weber A, Ferger P, Rehmann P (2007) Long-term analysis of telescopic crown retained removable partial dentures: survival and need for maintenance. J Dent 35:939–945. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jdent.2007.09.010. (PMID: 10.1016/j.jdent.2007.09.01017961902)
Eisenburger M, Gray G, Tschernitschek H (2000) Long-term results of telescopic crown retained dentures-a retrospective study. Eur J Prosthodont Restor Dent 8:87–91. (PMID: 11307565)
Koç D, Dog ̆an A, Bek B, (2011) Effect of gender, facial dimensions, body mass index and type of functional occlusion on bite force. J Appl Oral Sci 19:274–279. (PMID: 10.1590/S1678-77572011000300017216257464234342)
Ikebe K, Matsuda K, Morii K, Furuya-Yoshinaka M, Nokubi T, Renner RP (2006) Association of masticatory performance with age, posterior occlusal contacts, occlusal force, and salivary flow in older adults. Int J Prosthodont 19:475–481. (PMID: 17323726)
Hug S, Mantokoudis D, Mericske-Stern R (2006) Clinical evaluation of 3 overdenture concepts with tooth roots and implants: 2-year results. Int J Prosthodont 19:236–243. (PMID: 16752618)
Rinke S, Ziebolz D, Ratka-Krüger P, Frisch EJ (2015) Clinical outcome of double crown-retained mandibular removable dentures supported by a combination of residual teeth and strategic implants. Prosthodont 24:358–365. https://doi.org/10.1111/jopr.12214. (PMID: 10.1111/jopr.12214)
Hinz S, Arnold C, Setz J, Hey J, Schweyen R (2020) Complications of endodontically treated abutment teeth after restoration with non-precious metal double crowns. Clin Oral Investig 24:2809–2817. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00784-019-03145-y. (PMID: 10.1007/s00784-019-03145-y31728733)

Keywords: Complications; Double crown; General practice; Prostheses; Survival

Date Created: 20241221 Date Completed: 20241221 Latest Revision: 20241221

20241222

10.1007/s00784-024-06090-7

39708169