Question · asked by 1 review
Denzir all-ceramic FDP vs In-Ceram Zirconia all-ceramic FDP: Reconstruction failure / chip fractures (12 months)
- Population
- Patients with all-ceramic implant FDP reconstructions; parallel group, 12-month
- Intervention
- Denzir all-ceramic FDP
- Comparison
- In-Ceram Zirconia all-ceramic FDP
- Outcome
- Reconstruction failure / chip fractures (12 months)
What each review found
Include earlier review versions| Finding | Effect | Studies | GRADE certainty |
|---|---|---|---|
Denzir all-ceramic FDP vs In-Ceram Zirconia all-ceramic FDP Reconstruction failure / chip fractures (12 months) · Patients with all-ceramic implant FDP reconstructions; parallel group, 12-month · 12 months Interventions for replacing missing teeth: partially absent dentition (2012) · Cochrane All outcomes | None of the 25 reconstructions had failed; significantly more chip fractures in the Denzir group, but as none required repair this outcome was deemed not clinically significant (narrative) | 1 study · 18 participants | GRADE not reported |
Findings are shown side by side, never pooled across reviews.
The reviews
| Review | Searched up to | Included studies | AMSTAR 2 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Interventions for replacing missing teeth: partially absent dentition 2012 · Cochrane All outcomes | 2011-03 | Not listed | Not assessed |
How reviews are matched to this question
Reviews word the same question differently. Four decision models (TypeSafe's Jev, Liquid AI's d1-ultra, SubQ Snap and Baseten's Elephant) judged each wording of the population, intervention, comparator and outcome against the others; two wordings count as the same when at least three of them agree and none clearly disagrees, and findings count as this question only when all four elements match. Timing, setting and subgroup never split a question: they are shown on each finding.