Management of shortened dental arches and periodontal health: 5-year results of a randomised trial.

In a multicentre randomised trial (German Research Association, grants DFG WA 831/2-1 to 2-6, WO 677/2-1.1 to 2-2.1.; controlled-trials.com ISRCTN97265367), patients with complete molar loss in one jaw received either a partial removable dental prosthesis (PRDP) with precision attachments or treatment according to the SDA concept aiming at pre-molar occlusion. The objective of this current analysis was to evaluate the influence of different treatments on periodontal health. Linear mixed regression models were fitted to quantify the differences between the treatment groups. The assessment at 5 years encompassed 59 patients (PRDP group) and 46 patients (SDA group). For the distal measuring sites of the posterior-most teeth of the study jaw, significant differences were found for the plaque index according to Silness and Löe, vertical clinical attachment loss (CAL-V), probing pocket depth (PPD) and bleeding on probing. These differences were small and showed a slightly more unfavourable course in the PRDP group. With CAL-V and PPD, significant differences were also found for the study jaw as a whole. For CAL-V, the estimated group differences over 5 years amounted to 0.27 mm (95% CI 0.05; 0.48; P = 0.016) for the study jaw and 0.25 mm (95% CI 0.05; 0.45; P = 0.014) for the distal sites of the posterior-most teeth. The respective values for PPD were 0.22 mm (95% CI 0.03; 0.41; P = 0.023) and 0.32 mm (95% CI 0.13; 0.5; P = 0.001). It can be concluded that even in a well-maintained.patient group statistically significant although minor detrimental effects of PRDPs on periodontal health are measurable.

The randomized shortened dental arch study: oral health-related quality of life.

OBJECTIVES: Although the shortened dental arch (SDA) concept is a widely accepted strategy to avoid overtreatment, little is known on its impact on oral health-related quality of life (OHRQoL). This multicenter randomized controlled trial aimed to investigate the OHRQoL for removable partial dental prostheses (RPDP) with molar replacement versus the SDA concept. MATERIAL AND METHODS: In both groups, missing anterior teeth were replaced with fixed dental prosthesis. Two hundred fifteen patients with bilateral molar loss in at least one jaw were included. The Oral Health Impact Profile (OHIP-49) was completed before; 6 weeks (baseline), 6 months, and 12 months after treatment; and thereafter annually until 5 years. RESULTS: Of the initial cohort, 81 patients were assigned to the RPDP group and 71 to the SDA group (age, 34 to 86 years). Before treatment, the median OHIP score was similar in both groups (RPDP, 38.0; SDA, 40.0; n.s.). Results indicate marked improvements in OHRQoL in both groups between pretreatment and baseline (RPDP, 27.0; SDA, 19.0; p ≤ 0.0001) which continued in the RPDP group until the 1-year follow-up (p = 0.0002). These significant reductions in OHIP scores are reflected in its subscales. No further differences were seen within and between groups during the remainder observation period. CONCLUSION: Both treatments show a significant improvement in OHRQoL which continued in the RPDP group until the 1-year follow-up. No significant differences were seen between groups. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: For improving OHRQoL, it is not necessary to replace missing molars with a RPDP.

Randomized multi-centre study on the effect of training on tooth shade matching.

OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to find out whether Toothguide Trainer, TT, and Toothguide Training Box, TTB, show any training effects, independent of the shade guide chosen. METHODS: Students from four dental schools (N=78) were included in this study. The participants were randomized into a study, 42 students (age range: 19-27 years; 69% female, 31% male) and a control group of 36 students (age range: 19-30 years; 57% female, 43% male). The study group started with a double blind introduction test, followed by the TT and TTB training, finishing with the final test. The control group only passed the introduction and - after a break - the final test. Eight randomly chosen samples, seven of the Vita classical and one of the 3D-Master colour scale, were marked by barcodes. Colour matching was arranged by the Vita classical scale. RESULTS: The results of the pre- and final tests of both groups were combined. For every sample, the value ΔE was determined. The summation of all eight samples from the introduction and final tests offered a summarized ΔE value. The differences between introduction and final tests revealed the individual learning success. 47.6% of the study group showed statistically significant better results than the control group, 33% (p=0.031). CONCLUSION: TT and TTB show a positive effect of training on tooth shade matching independent of the colour scale used. CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE: Visual shade taking is the most frequent clinical method for shade determination. To increase better results in visual colour matching, TT and TTB training is used. This is the first study examining the training effect of TT and TTB using Vita classical scale.

The randomized shortened dental arch study: tooth loss over five years.

OBJECTIVES: The study was designed to provide clinical outcome data for two treatments of the shortened dental arch (SDA). MATERIAL AND METHODS: In a multicenter randomized controlled clinical trial, patients with complete molar loss in one jaw were provided with either a partial removable dental prosthesis (PRDP) retained with precision attachments or treated according to the SDA concept preserving or restoring a premolar occlusion. No implants were placed. The primary outcome was tooth loss. RESULTS: Of 152 treated patients, 132 patients reached the 5-year examination. Over 5 years, 38 patients experienced tooth loss. For the primary outcome tooth loss, the Kaplan-Meier survival rates at 5 years were 0.74 (95% CI 0.64, 0.84) in the PRDP group and 0.74 (95% CI 0.63, 0.85) in the SDA group. For tooth loss in the study jaw, the survival rates at 5 years were 0.88 (95% CI 0.80, 0.95) in the PRDP group and 0.84 (95% CI 0.74, 0.93) in the SDA group. The differences were not significant. No Cox regression models of appropriate fit explaining tooth loss on the patient level could be found. CONCLUSIONS: The overall treatment goals of a sustainable oral rehabilitation and the avoidance of further tooth loss over longer periods were not reliably achievable. The influence of the type of prosthetic treatment on tooth loss might have been overestimated. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Regarding our results, the patient's view will gain even more importance in the clinical decision between removable and fixed restorations in SDAs.

The randomized shortened dental arch study: 5-year maintenance.

The scientific evidence concerning prosthodontic care for the shortened dental arch (SDA) is sparse. This randomized multicenter study aimed to compare two common treatment options: removable partial dental prostheses (RPDPs) for molar replacement vs. no replacement (SDA). One of the hypotheses was that the follow-up treatment differs between patients with RPDPs and patients with SDAs during the 5-year follow-up period. Two hundred and fifteen patients with complete molar loss in one jaw were included in the study. Molars were either replaced by RPDPs or not replaced according to the SDA concept. A mean number of 4.2 (RPDP) and 2.8 (SDA) treatments for biological or technical reasons occurred during the 5-year observation time per patient. Concerning the biological aspect, no significant differences between the groups could be shown, whereas treatment arising from technical reasons was significantly more frequent for the RPDP group. When the severity of treatment was analyzed, a change over time was evident. When, at baseline, only follow-up treatment with minimal effort is required, over time there is a continuous increase to moderate and extensive effort observed for both groups (Controlled-trials.com number ISRCTN97265367).

The randomized shortened dental arch study: tooth loss.

The evidence concerning the management of shortened dental arch (SDA) cases is sparse. This multi-center study was aimed at generating data on outcomes and survival rates for two common treatments, removable dental prostheses (RDP) for molar replacement or no replacement (SDA). The hypothesis was that the treatments lead to different incidences of tooth loss. We included 215 patients with complete molar loss in one jaw. Molars were either replaced by RDP or not replaced, according to the SDA concept. First tooth loss after treatment was the primary outcome measure. This event occurred in 13 patients in the RDP group and nine patients in the SDA group. The respective Kaplan-Meier survival rates at 38 months were 0.83 (95% CI: 0.74-0.91) in the RDP group and 0.86 (95% CI: 0.78-0.95) in the SDA group, the difference being non-significant.