Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Electroplated and cast double crown-retained removable dental prostheses: 6-year results from a randomized clinical trial

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Clinical Oral Investigations Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Objectives

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the clinical performance of removable dental prostheses (RDP) supported by either electroplated (EP-RDP) or cast (C-RDP) double crowns.

Material and methods

Fifty-four participants received a total of 60 RDP. Two hundred and seventeen abutment teeth were provided with double crowns. The participants were randomly assigned to two groups (EP-RDP or C-RDP). Re-evaluations took place after 6 months and then once a year up to 6 years. Primary endpoint was survival time for RDP and abutment teeth; secondary endpoints were failure of facing, decementation of primary crown, and post-prosthetic endodontic treatment. T, U, and chi-squared tests were used to assess the homogeneity of the EP-RDP and C-RDP groups. Survival differences were analyzed with log-rank tests and Cox regression models; secondary endpoints were assessed by the use of logistic regression.

Results

Six-year survival was 77 % for EP-RDP and 97 % for C-RDP. Cumulative survival of abutment teeth was 85 % for EP-RDP and 91 % for C-RDP; differences between survivals in the two groups did not reach statistical significance. Survival of abutment teeth depended on tooth vitality. Failures of facings, decementations, or post-prosthetic endodontic treatments were not different between groups.

Conclusions

To identify possible differences between different double crown systems, longer follow-up periods and/or larger numbers of patients are needed.

Clinical relevance

Survival of teeth supporting double crown-retained RDP is affected by their vitality. Clinical performance was acceptable for both RDP supported by electroplated or cast double crowns.

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
Fig. 3

Similar content being viewed by others

References

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

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Igarashi Y, Goto T (1997) Ten-year follow-up study of conical crown-retained dentures. Int J Prosthodont 10:149–155

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Behr M, Hofmann E, Rosentritt M, Lang R, Handel G (2000) Technical failure rates of double crown-retained removable partial dentures. Clin Oral Investig 4:87–90

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. 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

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Wagner B, Kern M (2000) Clinical evaluation of removable partial dentures 10 years after insertion: success rates, hygienic problems, and technical failures. Clin Oral Investig 4:74–80

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Wenz HJ, Hertrampf K, Lehmann KM (2001) Clinical longevity of removable partial dentures retained by telescopic crowns: outcome of the double crown with clearance fit. Int J Prosthodont 14:207–213

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Saito M, Notani K, Miura Y, Kawasaki T (2002) Complications and failures in removable partial dentures: a clinical evaluation. J Oral Rehabil 29:627–633

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Widbom T, Lofquist L, Widbom C, Soderfeldt B, Kronstrom M (2004) Tooth-supported telescopic crown-retained dentures: an up to 9-year retrospective clinical follow-up study. Int J Prosthodont 17:29–34

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Piwowarczyk A, Köhler KC, Bender R, Büchler A, Lauer HC, Ottl P (2007) Prognosis for abutment teeth of removable dentures: a retrospective study. J Prosthodont 16:377–382

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Rehmann P, Weber A, Wöstmann B, Ferger P (2007) Clinical evaluation of teeth fitted with telescope crowns for retaining a partial denture. Dtsch Zahnärztl Z 62:99–103

    Google Scholar 

  11. 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

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Dittmann B, Rammelsberg P (2008) Survival of abutment teeth used for telescopic abutment retainers in removable partial dentures. Int J Prosthodont 21:319–321

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Behr M, Kolbeck C, Lang R, Hahnel S, Dirschl L, Handel G (2009) Clinical performance of cements as luting agents for telescopic double crown-retained removable partial and complete overdentures. Int J Prosthodont 22:479–487

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Szentpétery V, Lautenschläger C, Setz JM (2010) Longevity of frictional telescopic crowns in the severely reduced dentition: 3-year results of a longitudinal prospective clinical study. Quintessence Int 41:749–758

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Koller B, Att W, Strub JR (2011) Survival rates of teeth, implants, and double crown-retained removable dental prostheses: a systematic literature review. Int J Prosthodont 24:109–117

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. 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

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Breitman JB, Nakamura S, Freedman AL, Yalisove IL (2012) Telescopic retainers: an old or new solution? A second chance to have normal dental function. J Prosthodont 21:79–83

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Diedrichs G, Rosenhain P (1991) Galvanoteleskope in der direkten Technik. Quintessenz 42:49–56 (in German)

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Wirz J, Jäger K (1998) Galvanoteleskope – präzise, einfach und klinisch bewährt. Quintessenz 49:283–292 (in German)

    Google Scholar 

  20. Weigl P, Hahn L, Lauer HC (2000) Advanced biomaterials used for a new telescopic retainer for removable dentures: ceramic vs. electroplated gold copings: part I. In vitro tribology effects. J Biomed Mater Res (Appl Biomater) 53:320–336

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Weigl P, Lauer HC (2000) Advanced biomaterials used for a new telescopic retainer for removable dentures: ceramic vs. electroplated gold copings: part II. Clinical effects. J Biomed Mater Res (Appl Biomater) 53:337–347

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Rößler J, Göbel R, Welker D (2005) Der haftmechanismus von galvano-doppelkronen. ZWR 10:437–442 (in German)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Beuer F, Edelhoff D, Gernet W, Naumann M (2010) Parameters affecting retentive force of electroformed double-crown systems. Clin Oral Investig 14:129–135

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Bayer S, Kraus D, Keilig L, Gölz L, Stark H, Enkling N (2012) Wear of double crown systems: electroplated vs. casted female part. J Appl Oral Sci 20:384–391

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Gurbulak AG, Kilic K, Eroğlu Z, Gercekcioglu E, Kesim B (2013) Evaluation of the retention force of double conical crowns used in combination with a galvanoforming and casting fabrication technique. J Prosthodont 22:63–68

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Engels J, Schubert O, Güth JF, Hoffmann M, Jauernig C, Erdelt K, Stimmelmayr M, Beuer F (2013) Wear behavior of different double-crown systems. Clin Oral Investig 17:503–510

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Grossmann AC, Hassel AJ, Schilling O, Lehmann F, Koob A, Rammelsberg P (2007) Treatment with double crown-retained removable partial dentures and oral health-related quality of life in middle- and high-aged patients. Int J Prosthodont 20:576–578

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. 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 25:209–216

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Molin M, Bergman B, Ericson A (1993) A clinical evaluation of conical crown retained dentures. J Prosthet Dent 70:251–256

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Wegner PK, Freitag S, Kern M (2006) Survival rate of endodontically treated teeth with posts after prosthetic restoration. J Endod 32:928–931

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Murray PE, Smith AJ, Windsor LJ, Mjör IA (2003) Remaining dentine thickness and human pulp responses. Int Endod J 36:33–43

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Leles CR, Martins RR, Silva ET, Nunes MF (2009) Discriminant analysis of patients’ reasons for choosing or refusing treatments for partial edentulism. J Oral Rehabil 36:909–915

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

We thank all the patients in the study, especially for their high attendance during the recalls. We thank Wieland Pforzheim, Germany, for financial support of this study. The resources were used to compensate the patients for their additional effort attending recalls. The authors have no financially beneficial arrangements with Wieland. We also thank Ian Davies, copy editor, for the English language revision.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Prosthodontics, University Hospital Heidelberg, Im Neuenheimer Feld 400, 69120, Heidelberg, Germany

    Thomas Stober, Anne-Christiane Séché, Franziska Lehmann, Peter Rammelsberg & Wolfgang Bömicke

  2. Institute of Medical Biometry and Informatics, University Hospital Heidelberg, Im Neuenheimer Feld 305, Heidelberg, Germany

    Justo Lorenzo Bermejo

Authors
  1. Thomas Stober
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Justo Lorenzo Bermejo
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Anne-Christiane Séché
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Franziska Lehmann
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Peter Rammelsberg
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Wolfgang Bömicke
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Thomas Stober.

Additional information

Ethical standards

The study was reviewed and approved by the university’s review board (ethical approval no. 074/2003) and has therefore been performed in accordance with the ethical standards laid down in the 1964 Declaration of Helsinki and its later amendments. All participants gave their informed consent prior to their inclusion in the study.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Stober, T., Bermejo, J.L., Séché, AC. et al. Electroplated and cast double crown-retained removable dental prostheses: 6-year results from a randomized clinical trial. Clin Oral Invest 19, 1129–1136 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00784-014-1335-x

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00784-014-1335-x

Keywords

Search

Navigation