Skip to main content

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

The ultimate guide to restoration longevity in England and Wales. Part 5: crowns: time to next intervention and to extraction of the restored tooth

Key Points

  • Provides information on the survival of crowns in all teeth by analysis of the time to re-intervention on the crowns and time to extraction of the crowned tooth.

  • Approximately 1.2 million crowns were included in the study, of which circa 880,000 were metal-ceramic. Overall, 53% of crowns have survived at 15 years, with 63% having survived to 10 years and 77% to 5 years, with factors influencing survival being patient age and patient treatment need.

  • When the data are re-analysed with regard to time to extraction of the restored tooth, crowns perform poorly, with teeth restored with direct restorations in amalgam and resin composite having better times to extraction.

Access options

Rent or Buy article

Get time limited or full article access on ReadCube.

from$8.99

All prices are NET prices.

Figure 1
Figure 2
Figure 3
Figure 4
Figure 5
Figure 6
Figure 7
Figure 8
Figure 9
Figure 10
Figure 11
Figure 12
Figure 13
Figure 14
Figure 15
Figure 16
Figure 17
Figure 18
Figure 19
Figure 20
Figure 21
Figure 22
Figure 23
Figure 24
Figure 25
Figure 26

References

  1. 1

    Lucarotti P S K, Burke F J T . The ultimate guide to restoration longevity in England and Wales. Part 1: methodology. Br Dent J 2018; 224: 709–716.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. 2

    Information Centre for Health and Social Care, NHS Business Services Authority. Longitudinal Dental Treatment, 1990–2006. [data collection]. UK Data Service, 2012.

  3. 3

    Lumley P J, Lucarotti P S K, Burke F J T . Ten-year outcome of root fillings in the General Dental services in England and Wales. Int Endo J 2008; 41: 577–585.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. 4

    Drake C W . A comparison of restoration longevity in maxillary and mandibular teeth. J Amer Dent Assoc 1988; 116: 651–654.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. 5

    Lucarotti P S K, Burke F J T . The ultimate guide to restoration longevity in England and Wales. Part 2: Amalgam restorations – time to next intervention and to extraction of the restored tooth. Br Dent J 2018; 224: 789–800.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. 6

    Burke F J T, Lucarotti P S K . The ultimate guide to restoration longevity in England and Wales. Part 4: Composite restorations: time to next intervention and to extraction of the restored tooth. Br Dent J 2018; 224: 945–956

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. 7

    Burke F J T, Rivagi V, Mackenzie L, Priest N, Falcon H C . In vitro cavity and crown preparations and direct restorations carried out by Foundation Dentists (FDs) in the Oxford and Wessex Deaneries: A comparison of performance at the start and end of the FD programme. Br Dent J 2017; 222: 605–611.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. 8

    General Dental Council. Dentist Register, 2015. London: General Dental Council, 2015.

  9. 9

    Steele J G, O'Sulivan I . Adult Dental Health Survey 2009. London: Health and Social Care Information Centre, 2009.

  10. 10

    Papa J, Cain C, Messer H H . Moisture content of vital vs endodontically treated teeth. Endod Dent Traumatol 1994; 10: 91–93.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. 11

    Reeh ES, Messer H H, Douglas W H . Reduction in tooth stiffness as a result of endodontic and restorative procedures. J Endod 1989; 15: 512–516.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. 12

    Leempoel P J B, Eschen S, De Haan A F J, Van't Hof M A . An evaluation of crowns and bridges in a general dental practice. J Oral Rehabil 1985; 12: 515–528.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. 13

    Walton T . A 10-year longitudinal study of fixed prosthodontics: Clinical characteristics and outcome of single-unit metal-ceramic crowns. Int J Prosthodont 1999; 12: 519–526.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. 14

    Segal B . Retrospective assessment of 546 all-ceramic anterior and posterior crowns in a general practice. J Prosthet Dent 2001; 85: 544–550.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. 15

    Pjetursson B E, Sailer I, Zwahlen M, Hammerle C H F . A systematic review of the survival and complication rates of all-ceramic and meta-ceramic reconstructions after an observation period of at least 3 years. PartI: single crowns. Clin Oral Impl Res 2007; 18 (suppl. 3): 73–85.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. 16

    Donovan T, Simonsen R J, Guertin G, Tucker R V . Retrospective clinical evaluation of 1314 cast gold restorations in service from 1 to 52 years. J Esthet Rest Dent 2004; 16: 194–204.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. 17

    Hill E E . Dental cements for definitive luting: A review and practical clinical considerations. Dent Clin N Am 2007; 61: 643–658.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

The authors acknowledge the support of the Economic and Social Data Service, the Health and Social Care Information Centre and the NHS Business Services Authority for collating and releasing this valuable data resource.

Author information

Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to F. J. T. Burke.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Burke, F., Lucarotti, P. The ultimate guide to restoration longevity in England and Wales. Part 5: crowns: time to next intervention and to extraction of the restored tooth. Br Dent J 225, 33–48 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1038/sj.bdj.2018.523

Download citation

Further reading

Search

Quick links