188宝金博页面版

Evaluate the clinical performance of Bio-HPP and Vitallium frameworks in free-end removable partial denturesTong Zhai 1,3 , Mengting Li 1,3 , Yu Zheng 2? & Zhenzhen Wang 1?Denture defects af f ect patients’ aesthetic appearance and masticatory function, thus reducing their quality of life. There are many ways to repair denture defects, among which removable partial dentures are a basic and widely used method. The purpose of this study was to compare the clinical performance of Bio-HPP and Vitallium frameworks in the restoration of free-end removable partial dentures. 80 patients with free-end removable partial dentures treated at the Stomatology Hospital of Xi’an jiaotong university from January 2022 to March 2023 were randomly divided into two groups. 40 patients in the control group received Vitallium frameworks and 40 patients in the observation group received Bio-HPP frameworks. The abutment tooth mobility, gingival index, and patient satisfaction after one year of restoration were compared and analyzed between the two groups using an Independent T-test. P < 0.05 was considered signif i cant. All our experiments were carried out in accordance with relevant standards and regulations of Stomatology Hospital of Xi 'an Jiaotong University. After 1-year follow-up, in terms of aesthetics, comfort, and patient satisfaction, Bio-HPP was signif i cantly superior to Vitallium frameworks, whereas the opposite was true for denture stability (P < 0.05). Besides, there were no signif i cant dif f erences in the mobility of abutment teeth and gingival index between Bio-HPP and Vitallium frameworks (P > 0.05). Both Bio-HPP and Vitallium frameworks can be used in restoring free-end removable partial dentures and the performance of the restorations was clinically acceptable. However, Bio-HPP has unique advantages in terms of aesthetics and comfort.Keywords Vitallium, Bio-HPP, Removable partial denture, Dentition defect, Oral materialsDentition defect refer to the varying degrees of tooth loss in dif f erent segments of the upper or lower dentition, constituting a prevalent clinical condition. Multiple factors contribute to dental defects, notably caries, periodontitis, and dental trauma, ultimately resulting in tooth loosening and eventual loss. Th ese defects signif i cantly impact the patient’s chewing function, speech articulation, and aesthetic appearance 1,2 . Currently, various methods are employed for repairing dentition defect, including fi xed bridge, implant, and removable partial dentures restoration (RPDs). For patients who do not meet the criteria for fi xed bridge and implant restoration, RPDs frequently serve as the sole viable option 3–5 .RPDs are a type of dental appliance that utilizes the remaining natural teeth, mucous membranes, and alveolar ridge as support and retention mechanisms, restoring the functionality of missing teeth through the use of artif i cial teeth 6 . Th ese dentures can be categorized into Kennedy Class I, Kennedy Class II, Kennedy Class III and Kennedy Class IV based on the Kennedy classif i cation 7 . Given the varying strengths, hardness, and toughness of denture materials, dental researchers have conducted extensive studies to evaluate the restoration ef f ects of each material 8 . Traditionally, cobalt–chromium (Co–Cr) alloys has been the primary material used for denture frameworks. However, with advancements in materials science, newer options such as Bego Partial Denture (BPD) perfect stand, Vitallium, and pure titanium denture frameworks have emerged 9 . Some studies comparing Vitallium with pure titanium and Co–Cr alloy in clinical analysis have found that Vitallium RPDs achieve higher overall satisfaction. Th e reason is that Co–Cr alloy have relatively lower elasticity, resulting in poorer comfort, while pure titanium RPDs are prone to breakage due to manufacturing defects. However, the 1 Key Laboratory of Shaanxi Province for Craniofacial Precision Medicine Research, College of Stomatology, Xi’an Jiaotong University, Xi’an 710004, Shaanxi, China. 2 Hospital of Xi’an University of Architecture and Technology, Xi’an 710055, Shaanxi, China. 3 Tong Zhai and Mengting Li contributed equally to this work. ? email: 23356478@qq.com; wz6619@xjtu.edu.cnOPENScientif i c Reports | (2025) 15:28777 1 | https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-025-11370-7www.nature.com/scientificreports