2012•Journal of Dental Prevention and TreatmentRequires access

Observation of clinical effect of different prosthetic materials on mandibular first molars after hemisection

Zhu Ya-qia

Open publisher page 0 citations

Abstract

Objective To discuss the clinical effect on mandibular first molars with different prosthetics after hemisection.Methods A total of 54 molars received mesial hemisection and root canal therapy(RCT) with the distal roots were divided into two groups.The ceramic united crowns with mandibular second premolars were applied in ceramic group,while PFM united crowns with mandibular second premolars were used in PFM group.The clinical effects were compared after 3 months' follow-up.Results Seventeen cases(62.96%) in PFM group had periodontal changes,in which 15 cases were mild and 2 cases were severe.Only 1 case(3.70%) in ceramic group had mild periodontal changes.There was a statistically significant difference between the two groups.Conclusion The clinical effect of ceramic material is better than PFM on mandibular first molars with united crowns after hemisection.

About this research paper

What this paper is about

Objective To discuss the clinical effect on mandibular first molars with different prosthetics after hemisection.Methods A total of 54 molars received mesial hemisection and root canal therapy(RCT) with the distal roots were divided into two groups.The ceramic united crowns with mandibular second premolars were applied in ceramic group,while PFM united crowns with mandibular second premolars were used in PFM group.The clinical effects were compared after 3 months' follow-up.Results Seventeen cases(62.96%) in PFM group had periodontal changes,in which 15 cases were mild and 2 cases were severe.Only 1 case(3.70%) in ceramic group had mild periodontal changes.There was a statistically significant difference between the two groups.Conclusion The clinical effect of ceramic material is better than PFM on mandibular first molars with united crowns after hemisection.

Why it matters

A significance statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

Objective To discuss the clinical effect on mandibular first molars with different prosthetics after hemisection.Methods A total of 54 molars received mesial hemisection and root canal therapy(RCT) with the distal roots were divided into two groups.The ceramic united crowns with mandibular second premolars were applied in ceramic group,while PFM united crowns with mandibular second premolars were used in PFM group.The clinical effects were compared after 3 months' follow-up.Results Seventeen cases(62.96%) in PFM group had periodontal changes,in which 15 cases were mild and 2 cases were severe.Only 1 case(3.70%) in ceramic group had mild periodontal changes.There was a statistically significant difference between the two groups.Conclusion The clinical effect of ceramic material is better than PFM on mandibular first molars with united crowns after hemisection.

Key concepts: Molar, Dentistry, Mandibular molar, Medicine, Mandibular first molar, Orthodontics, Mandibular second molar, Significant difference

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
Observation of clinical effect of different prosthetic materials on mandibular first molars after hemisection — Research Paper | ScholarLens