Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Clinical performance of removable dental prostheses in the moderately reduced dentition: a systematic literature review

  • Review
  • Published:
Clinical Oral Investigations Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Objectives

Evidence-based therapeutic recommendations for removable dental prostheses are still lacking. The aim of the present study was a systematic review and meta-analysis of the survival rates of removable dentures in the moderately reduced dentition.

Materials and methods

In 2014, a systematic literature search in established medical databases (MEDLINE, EMBASE, BIOSIS, SciSearch, Cochrane, FIZ Technik Web) and a hand search of relevant dental journals were conducted. The search terms were relevant MeSH terms, free search terms, and combinations of the two. The search included RCTs, prospective and retrospective studies on survival rates of removable dental prostheses in the moderately reduced dentition with at least 15 participants, an observation period of at least 2 years, and a dropout rate of less than 25 %. The selection of relevant publications was carried out at the title, abstract, and full-text level by at least two of the authors involved. The publications included were tabulated and analyzed.

Results

Of the original 12,994 matches, 1923 were analyzed by title, 650 by abstract, and 111 according to the full text. The final review included 19 publications, of which 6 were multiple publications. Cast-metal framework dentures exhibited failure rates of between 33 and 50 % after 5 years. One study with a 25-year observation period reported failure rates of 50 %. Better results were obtained with proper pretreatment and a good recall scheme. Bilateral attachment prostheses showed failure rates of between 11 and 30 % after 5 years. Unilateral attachment prostheses showed failure rates of 75 % after 5 years. Double-crown prostheses dentures show failure rates of 0 to 21.7 % after 3 to 6 years.

Conclusions

Heterogeneous study designs and data analyses rendered a meta-analysis impossible, so that an evaluation at the highest level of evidence could not be performed.

Clinical relevance

Within the limitations of this study, it would be correct to state that removable dental prostheses, given suitable pretreatment and follow-up regimes, can provide satisfactory solutions. Based on only one paper, they revealed acceptable results even over a very long observation period (25 years).

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Hirotomi T, Yoshihara A, Ogawa H, Miyazaki H (2010) Tooth-related risk factors for periodontal disease in community-dwelling elderly people. J Clin Periodontol 37(6):494–500. doi:10.1111/j.1600-051X.2010.01565.x

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Thomason JM, Moynihan PJ, Steen N, Jepson NJ (2007) Time to survival for the restoration of the shortened lower dental arch. J Dent Res 86(7):646–650

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Watt RG, Steele JG, Treasure ET, White DA, Pitts NB, Murray JJ (2013) Adult Dental Health Survey 2009: implications of findings for clinical practice and oral health policy. Br Dent J 214(2):71–75. doi:10.1038/sj.bdj.2013.50

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Dye BA TS, Smith V, Lewis BG, Barker LK, Thornton-Evans G, et al. (2007) Trends in oral health status: United States, 1988–1994 and 1999–2004. Vital and Health Statistics Series, Series 11, No 248 National Center for Health Statistics

  5. Micheelis W SU (2006) Vierte Deutsche Mundgesundheitsstudie (DMS IV) Deutscher Ärzteverlag Köln,

  6. Tan K, Pjetursson BE, Lang NP, Chan ES (2004) A systematic review of the survival and complication rates of fixed partial dentures (FPDs) after an observation period of at least 5 years. Clin oral implants res 15(6):654–666. doi:10.1111/j.1600-0501.2004.01119.x

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Pjetursson BE, Tan K, Lang NP, Bragger U, Egger M, Zwahlen M (2004) A systematic review of the survival and complication rates of fixed partial dentures (FPDs) after an observation period of at least 5 years. Clin oral implants res 15(6):667–676. doi:10.1111/j.1600-0501.2004.01120.x

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Liberati A, Altman DG, Tetzlaff J, Mulrow C, Gotzsche PC, Ioannidis JP, Clarke M, Devereaux PJ, Kleijnen J, Moher D (2009) The PRISMA statement for reporting systematic reviews and meta-analyses of studies that evaluate health care interventions: explanation and elaboration. J Clin Epidemiol 62(10):e1–34. doi:10.1016/j.jclinepi.2009.06.006

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Luthardt RSJ, Böning K, Walter M (2000) Therapie der verkürzten Zahnreihe. Deutsche zahnarztliche Zeitschrift 55(9):592–609

    Google Scholar 

  10. Au AR, Lechner SK, Thomas CJ, Mori T, Chung P (2000) Titanium for removable partial dentures (III): 2-year clinical follow-up in an undergraduate programme. J Oral Rehabil 27(11):979–985

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Bergman B, Hugoson A, Olsson CO (1995) A 25 year longitudinal study of patients treated with removable partial dentures. J Oral Rehabil 22(8):595–599

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Bergman B, Hugoson A, Olsson CO (1982) Caries, periodontal and prosthetic findings in patients with removable partial dentures: a ten-year longitudinal study. J Prosthet Dent 48(5):506–514

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Bergman B, Hugoson A, Olsson CO (1977) Caries and periodontal status in patients fitted with removable partial dentures. J Clin Periodontol 4(2):134–146

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Bergman B, Hugoson A, Olsson CO (1971) Periodontal and prosthetic conditions in patients treated with removable partial dentures and artificial crowns. A longitudinal two-year study. Acta Odontol Scand 29(6):621–638

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Bergman B, Ericson A, Molin M (1996) Long-term clinical results after treatment with conical crown-retained dentures. Int J Prosthodont 9(6):533–538

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Besimo C, Gachter M, Jahn M, Hassell T (1997) Clinical performance of resin-bonded fixed partial dentures and extracoronal attachments for removable prostheses. J Prosthet Dent 78(5):465–471

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Budtz-Jørgensen E, Isidor F (1990) A 5-year longitudinal study of cantilevered fixed partial dentures compared with removable partial dentures in a geriatric population. J Prosthet Dent 64(1):42–47

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Budtz-Jørgensen E, Isidor F (1987) Cantilever bridges or removable partial dentures in geriatric patients: a two-year study. J Oral Rehabil 14(3):239–249

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Kapur KK, Deupree R, Dent RJ, Hasse AL (1994) A randomized clinical trial of two basic removable partial denture designs. Part I: comparisons of five-year success rates and periodontal health. J Prosthet Dent 72(3):268–282

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Kapur KK (1989) Veterans Administration Cooperative Dental Implant Study–comparisons between fixed partial dentures supported by blade-vent implants and removable partial dentures. Part II: comparisons of success rates and periodontal health between two treatment modalities. J Prosthet Dent 62(6):685–703

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Mock FRSH, Stark HK (2005) Eine klinische Langzeitstudie zur Bewährung von Teleskopprothesen. Success of telescopic crowns—a prospective long-term study. Deut Zahnarztliche Zeitschrift 60(3):148–153

    Google Scholar 

  22. Rehmann P (2006) Retrospektive Longitudinalstudie über die langfristige Bewährung von Teleskopprothesen unter besonderer Berücksichtigung der Instandhaltungskosten. Deut Zahnarztliche Zeitschrift (8)

  23. Schmitt J, Wichmann M, Eitner S, Hamel J, Holst S (2011) Five-year clinical follow-up of prefabricated precision attachments: a comparison of uni- and bilateral removable dental prostheses. Quintessence Int (Berlin, Germany: 1985) 42(5):413–418

    Google Scholar 

  24. Stober T, Bermejo JL, Beck-Mussoter J, Seche AC, Lehmann F, Koob J, Rammelsberg P (2012) Clinical performance of conical and electroplated telescopic double crown-retained partial dentures: a randomized clinical study. Int J Prosthodont 25(3):209–216

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Walter MH, Weber A, Marre B, Gitt I, Gerss J, Hannak W, Hartmann S, Heydecke G, Huppertz J, Jahn F, Ludwig A, Mundt T, Kern M, Klein V, Pospiech P, Stumbaum M, Wolfart S, Wostmann B, Busche E, Boning K, Luthardt RG (2010) The randomized shortened dental arch study: tooth loss. J Dent Res 89(8):818–822

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Walter MH, Hannak W, Kern M, Mundt T, Gernet W, Weber A, Wostmann B, Stark H, Werner D, Hartmann S, Range U, Jahn F, Passia N, Pospiech P, Mitov G, Bruckner J, Wolfart S, Busche E, Luthardt RG, Heydecke G, Marre B (2013) The randomized shortened dental arch study: tooth loss over five years. Clin Oral Investig 17(3):877–886. doi:10.1007/s00784-012-0761-x

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Ericson A, Nilsson B, Bergman B (1990) Clinical results in patients provided with conical crown retained dentures. Int J Prosthodont 3(6):513–521

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Prosthetic Dentistry, Center of Dentistry,, Ulm University, Albert-Einstein-Allee 11, 89081, Ulm, Germany

    Ovidiu Moldovan, Heike Rudolph & Ralph G. Luthardt

  2. Philippine-Welser-Straße 15, 86150, Augsburg, Germany

    Ovidiu Moldovan

Authors
  1. Ovidiu Moldovan
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Heike Rudolph
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Ralph G. Luthardt
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Ovidiu Moldovan.

Ethics declarations

Funding

This study was funded by the German Society of Dental, Oral, and Craniomandibular Sciences (Deutsche Gesellschaft für Zahn-, Mund- und Kieferheilkunde).

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Ethical approval

This article does not contain any studies with human participants or animals performed by any of the authors.

Informed consent

There was no need for informed consent, as no individual participants were involved in this study.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Moldovan, O., Rudolph, H. & Luthardt, R.G. Clinical performance of removable dental prostheses in the moderately reduced dentition: a systematic literature review. Clin Oral Invest 20, 1435–1447 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00784-016-1873-5

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00784-016-1873-5

Keywords

Search

Navigation