| 000 | 02918cam a2200337 a 4500 | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| 003 | EG-GiCUC | ||
| 005 | 20250223032905.0 | ||
| 008 | 211227s2021 ua dho f m 000 0 eng d | ||
| 040 |
_aEG-GiCUC _beng _cEG-GiCUC |
||
| 041 | 0 | _aeng | |
| 049 | _aDeposite | ||
| 097 | _aPh.D | ||
| 099 | _aCai01.09.09.Ph.D.2021.Re.A | ||
| 100 | 0 | _aReem Mohamed Ali Gabr | |
| 245 | 1 | 0 |
_aAssessment of peri-implant tissues surrounding peek and porcelain fused to metal superstructures in posterior region : _bA randomized controlled clinical trial / _cReem Mohamed Ali Gabr ; Supervised Hesham Alansary , Rana Sherif |
| 246 | 1 | 5 |
_aتقييم الانسجة المحيطة بغرسات سنية ذات تركيبات فوقية مصنعة من البيك و تركيبات فوقية معدنية مغطاة بالبورسيلين في المنطقة الخلفية : _bتجربة سريرية عشوائية |
| 260 |
_aCairo : _bReem Mohamed Ali Gabr , _c2021 |
||
| 300 |
_a213 P. : _bcharts , facsimiles , photoghraphs ; _c25cm |
||
| 502 | _aThesis (Ph.D.) - Cairo University - Faculty of Oral and Dental Medicine - Department of Prosthodontics | ||
| 520 | _aAim: This randomized clinical study aimed to compare the clinical performance of PEEK and PFM restorations with regard to the biological parameters, technical outcomes, and patient satisfaction.The study was conducted in participants receiving single posterior implant supported crowns Methodology : Twenty-three patients were enrolled in the study according to specific inclusion and exclusion criteria. Each patient received an implant to replace single missing tooth in posterior region. The patients were distributed among two groups.The first group (control) included (n=12) PFM implant supported crowns, the second group (comparator) included (n=11) PEEK implant supported crowns. Peri implant soft tissue parameters were evaluated using the (mPI, BOP, PD, and mGI), crestal bone loss was measured (CBL), technical complications (screw loosening, veneer chipping, fracture), implant survival, patient satisfaction (VAS), and FIPS. Results: there was no statistical significant difference between the mean of soft tissue parameters in the two groups, the mean crestal bone loss was statistically less in PEEK group the PFM. No statistical significant differences were found between the types of crows, with 100% implant survival. For the patient satisfaction regarding the crown esthetics PEEK crowns had statistically higher esthetic acceptance than PFM ones. No statistical significant differences were found for FIPS score in both groups | ||
| 530 | _aIssued also as CD | ||
| 653 | 4 | _aImplant | |
| 653 | 4 | _aPEEK | |
| 653 | 4 | _aPFM | |
| 700 | 0 |
_aHesham Alansary , _eSupervisor |
|
| 700 | 0 |
_aRana Sherif , _eSupervisor |
|
| 856 | _uhttp://172.23.153.220/th.pdf | ||
| 905 |
_aNazla _eRevisor |
||
| 905 |
_aShimaa _eCataloger |
||
| 942 |
_2ddc _cTH |
||
| 999 |
_c83733 _d83733 |
||