https://cyberleninka.org/article/n/247243.pdf

Current status of zirconia restoration.

From porcelain-fused-to-metal to zirconia: clinical and experimental considerations.

OBJECTIVES: To assess the 5-year survival rates and incidences of complications of cemented and screw-retained implant reconstructions. METHODS: An electronic Medline search complemented by manual searching was conducted to identify randomized controlled clinical trials (RCTs), and prospective and retrospective studies giving information on cemented and screw-retained single-unit and multiple-unit implant reconstructions with a mean follow-up time of at least 1 year. Assessment of the identified studies and data abstraction were performed independently by three reviewers. Failure rates were analyzed using Poisson regression models to obtain summary estimates and 95% confidence intervals of failure rates and 5-year survival proportions. RESULTS: Fifty-nine clinical studies were selected from an initial yield of 4511 titles and the data were extracted. For cemented single crowns the estimated 5-year reconstruction survival was 96.5% (95% confidence interval (CI): 94.8-97.7%), for screw-retained single crowns it was 89.3% (95% CI: 64.9-97.1%) (P = 0.091 for difference). The 5-year survival for cemented partial fixed dental prostheses (FDPs) was 96.9% (95% CI: 90.8-99%), similar to the one for screw-retained partial FDPs with 98% (95% CI: 96.2-99%) (P = 0.47). For cemented full-arch FDPs the 5-year survival was 100% (95% CI: 88.9-100%), which was somewhat higher than that for screw-retained FDPs with 95.8% (95% CI: 91.9-97.9%) (P = 0.54). The estimated 5-year cumulative incidence of technical complications at cemented single crowns was 11.9% and 24.4% at screw-retained crowns. At the partial and full-arch FDPs, in contrast, a trend to less complication at the screw-retained was found than at the cemented ones (partial FDPs cemented 24.5%, screw-retained 22.1%; full-arch FDPs cemented 62.9%, screw-retained 54.1%). Biological complications like marginal bone loss >2 mm occurred more frequently at cemented crowns (5-year incidence: 2.8%) than at screw-retained ones (5-year incidence: 0%). CONCLUSION: Both types of reconstructions influenced the clinical outcomes in different ways, none of the fixation methods was clearly advantageous over the other. Cemented reconstructions exhibited more serious biological complications (implant loss, bone loss >2 mm), screw-retained reconstructions exhibited more technical problems. Screw-retained reconstructions are more easily retrievable than cemented reconstructions and, therefore, technical and eventually biological complications can be treated more easily. For this reason and for their apparently higher biological compatibility, these reconstructions seem to be preferable.

Cemented and screw‐retained implant reconstructions: a systematic review of the survival and complication rates

Ceramic dental biomaterials and CAD/CAM technology: state of the art.

Statement of problem Evidence is limited on the efficacy of zirconia-based fixed dental prostheses. Purpose The purpose of this systemic review was to assess zirconia-based FDPs in terms of survival and complications. Material and methods Searches performed in PubMed databases were enriched by hand searches to identify suitable publications. The keywords used were: "zirconia" and "fixed dental prosthesis," "zirconia" and "crown," "zirconia" and "fixed partial denture" and "humans," "zirconia" and "crown" and "humans," "crown" and "all-ceramics," and "fixed partial denture" and "all-ceramics". Titles and abstracts were read to identify literature that fulfilled the inclusion criteria. Only peer reviewed clinical studies published in the English language from January 1999 through June 2011 were included. Results Twelve clinical studies based on zirconia, framework design, and porcelain veneering technique met the inclusion criteria. Of the studies identified, 1 was a randomized clinical study with 3-year follow-up results; the others were cohort prospective studies. Clinical complications included chipping of veneering porcelain, abutment failure, and framework fracture. One study investigated pressed ceramics as the veneering material and found no chipping of veneering porcelain after 3 years. Conclusions Short term clinical data suggest that zirconia-based fixed dental prostheses may serve as an alternative to metal ceramic fixed dental prostheses in the anterior and posterior dentition.

Survival and complications of zirconia-based fixed dental prostheses: a systematic review.

This prospective clinical trial aimed at evaluating the clinical performance of three-unit posterior zirconia fixed dental prostheses (FDPs) after 5 years of clinical function. Thirty-seven patients received 48 three-unit zirconia-based FDPs. The restorations replaced either a premolar or a molar. Specific inclusion criteria were needed. Tooth preparation was standardized. Computer-aided design/computer-assisted manufacturing frameworks with a 9-mm2 cross section of the connector and a 0.6-mm minimum thickness of the retainer were made. The restorations were luted with resin cement. The patients were recalled after 1, 6, 12, 24, 36, 48, and 60 months. The survival and success of the ceramics and zirconia were evaluated. The technical and aesthetic outcomes were examined using the United States Public Health Service criteria. The biologic outcomes were analyzed at abutment and contralateral teeth. Descriptive statistics were performed. All FDPs completed the study, resulting in 100% cumulative survival rate and 91.9% and 95.4% cumulative success rates for patients wearing one and two FDPs, respectively. No losses of retention were recorded. Forty-two restorations were rated alpha in all measured parameters. A minor chipping of the ceramics was detected in three restorations. No significant differences between the periodontal parameters of the test and control teeth were observed. Five-year clinical results proved that three-unit posterior zirconia-based FDPs were successful in the medium term for both function and aesthetic. Zirconia can be considered a promising substitute of metal frameworks for the fabrication of short-span posterior prostheses.

Five-year prospective clinical study of posterior three-unit zirconia-based fixed dental prostheses

Objectives: The present study aimed at evaluating the marginal bone resorption and the peri-implant tissue conditions around Narrow-Neck ITI implants in the implant–prosthetic treatment of the agenesis of maxillary lateral incisors.

Material and methods: Thirty patients affected by monolateral or bilateral agenesis of the maxillary lateral incisors were selected. Thirty-four ITI-SLA Narrow Neck implants were inserted and loaded about 4 months after the surgical procedure. The final restorations were realized using Aureo Galvan Crowns veneered with feldspathic ceramics. The follow-up period ranged from 24 to 39 months. Both marginal bone resorption and soft tissue quality were evaluated. The data were statistically analysed using analysis of variance (ANOVA) for repeated measures, one-way ANOVA and Tukey's post hoc test (P=0.05).

Results: During the 24–39-month follow-up period, no implant showed either pain and sensitivity or mobility. After 39 months of functional loading, a cumulative survival rate of 97.06% and a cumulative success rate of 94.12% were calculated.

Conclusions: In case of maxillary lateral incisor agenesis, the implant–prosthetic approach has proved to be a reliable and predictable treatment for both re-establishment of function and aesthetics. Satisfactory values of marginal bone resorption over time and optimal conditions of peri-implant tissue around Narrow-Neck ITI implants were found.

Prosthetic treatment of maxillary lateral incisor agenesis with osseointegrated implants: a 24–39-month prospective clinical study

Background: 

The Procera AllCeram™ (Nobel Biocare AB, Goteborg, Sweden, and Procera Sandvik AB, Stockholm, Sweden) technique is one alternative to metal-ceramic restorations. However, few long-term evaluations of its use for single crowns on natural and implant-supported abutments are available.



Purpose: 

The aim of the present study was to assess the clinical performance of Procera AllCeram single crowns when placed in aesthetic sites supported by either natural teeth or implants over a period of 48 months.



Materials and Methods: 

Eighty-six single crowns were fabricated and used in 51 patients. The restorations were examined according to the California Dental Association's quality assessment system.



Results: 

One crown was lost after 20 months of follow-up. Of the 85 restorations that completed the 48-month follow-up, only one crown (1.2%) showed a veneering porcelain chip. All crowns were ranked as either excellent or acceptable. The success rates of single crowns supported by natural tooth and implant-supported abutments were 100% and 98.3%, respectively; the total crown success rate was 98.8%.



Conclusion: 

Within the limitations of the present study, Procera AllCeram crowns proved to be a reliable therapeutic choice for the restoration of anterior teeth on both natural and implant-supported abutments. The hybrid glass-ionomer cement used in the present study appeared to be a reliable luting agent.

Simona Russo

Papers

From porcelain-fused-to-metal to zirconia: clinical and experimental considerations.

Five-year prospective clinical study of posterior three-unit zirconia-based fixed dental prostheses

Prosthetic treatment of maxillary lateral incisor agenesis with osseointegrated implants: a 24–39-month prospective clinical study

Retrospective Clinical Evaluation of 86 Procera AllCeram™ Anterior Single Crowns on Natural and Implant‐Supported Abutments