Clinical outcomes of zirconia-based implant- and tooth-supported single crowns

Nejatidanesh, Farahnaz; Moradpoor, Hedaiat; Savabi, Omid

doi:10.1007/s00784-015-1479-3

Cited by 41 publications

(32 citation statements)

References 38 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Previous publications evaluating the same material composition (Cercon/Cercon Ceram Kiss; DeguDent, Hanau, Germany) in a comparable setup found significantly higher complication rates of 7.5% after 6 months and 24.5% after two years, respectively [9,23]. Furthermore, the patient-reported outcome was assessed in this trial [22], revealing a high patient satisfaction, as observed in the present investigation. However, the patients were surveyed only once after the treatment.…”

Section: Patient-reported Outcome (Vas)supporting

confidence: 83%

“…Hence, the provided data on the technical outcome can be considered comparable to our results. In a retrospective study, Nejatidanesh and co-workers evaluated 232 cemented implant-supported SCs placed in 122 patients after a mean exposure time of 59.2 months [22]. Fracture of the veneering ceramic occurred in 8.2% of the restorations (n = 19; 7 anterior, 12 posterior), and two replacements were necessary.…”

Section: Patient-reported Outcome (Vas)mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

All-ceramic, bi-layered crowns supported by zirconia implants: Three-year results of a prospective multicenter study

Spies

Balmer

Jung

et al. 2017

Journal of Dentistry

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

OBJECTIVES: To determine the clinical and patient-reported outcomes of bi-layered, allceramic posterior single crowns (SCs) supported by zirconia implants in an uncontrolled, prospective, multicenter study. METHODS: In two centers, 60 patients received 71 one-piece zirconia oral implants to be restored with either SCs (n=49) or three-unit fixed dental prostheses (n=11). Of these patients, 45 implants were restored with all-ceramic, zirconia-based posterior SCs (one per patient). Survival rates of implants and reconstructions were assessed, and technical success was evaluated according to modified U.S. Public Health Service (USPHS) criteria. Furthermore, patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) were assessed by applying visual analog scales (VAS). Kaplan-Meier (KM) plots and log-rank tests were used for success/survival analyses. The Wilcoxon matched-pairs signed-rank test was used to evaluate time effects on response variables (PROMs, USPHS criteria). RESULTS: Forty patients with 40 SCs could be evaluated after 36.7±1.2months. No SC was replaced, resulting in 100% survival. The KM success estimate was 87.5% (two chippings, one restoration margin, and one contour were rated Charlie). In general, the incidence of chipping (p=.0005) and occlusal roughness (p=.0003) was frequent. Compared with the pre-treatment patient surveys (67-93%), all surveys at prosthetic delivery except for speech (p=.139) showed significantly improved VAS scores (81-94%; p<.0001). Thereafter, no decrease in satisfaction could be observed over time until the 3-year follow-up (86-93%; p.390). CONCLUSION: Veneered, zirconia-based SCs supported by zirconia implants satisfied patients' needs highly. However, significant incidence of chipping and roughness of the veneering ceramic may compromise the clinical longterm outcome for this indication. CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE: Posterior, zirconia-based SCs supported by zirconia oral implants entirely survived the follow-up period of 3 years, but two major chippings, one a significant marginal opening and one pronounced over-contouring, resulted in a reduced KM success estimate of 87.5% after 36 months of observation. Spies, Benedikt C; Balmer, Marc; Jung, Ronald E; Sailer, Irena; Vach, Kirstin; Kohal, Ralf-Joachim (2017 AbstractObjectives: To determine the clinical and patient-reported outcomes of bi-layered, all-ceramic posterior single crowns (SCs) supported by zirconia implants in an uncontrolled, prospective, multicenter study.Methods: In two centers, 60 patients received 71 one-piece zirconia oral implants to be restored with either SCs (n = 49) or three-unit fixed dental prostheses (n = 11). Of these patients, 45 implants were restored with all-ceramic, zirconia-based posterior SCs (one per patient). Survival rates of implants and reconstructions were assessed, and technical success was evaluated according to modified U.S. Public Health Service (USPHS) criteria.Furthermore, patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) were assessed by applying visual analog scales (VAS). Kaplan-Meier (KM) ...

show abstract

Section: Patient-reported Outcome (Vas)supporting

confidence: 83%

Section: Patient-reported Outcome (Vas)mentioning

confidence: 99%

All-ceramic, bi-layered crowns supported by zirconia implants: Three-year results of a prospective multicenter study

Spies

Balmer

Jung

et al. 2017

Journal of Dentistry

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…To cover this risk the authors suggested full‐cast metal or monolithic zirconia crowns as possible options for crowns located on terminal abutments . Nejatidanesh and colleagues re‐examined 142 anterior and 182 posterior tooth‐supported single crowns after a mean of 60.7 months and calculated cumulative ceramic fracture‐free survival of 91% . The incidence of chipping was significantly ( p = 0.004) higher for molar and anterior crowns than for premolars .…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 38%

“…The incidence of chipping was significantly ( p = 0.004) higher for molar and anterior crowns than for premolars . This was ascribed to larger occlusal forces in the posterior region and an unfavorable load direction for anterior teeth . In comparison with these studies, in the present study mechanical stability of the restoration material was superior: fracture‐free survival was 98.5% for PZCs (60.6% located in the anterior region) and 100% for MZCs (96.6% located in the posterior region).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 98%

Short‐Term Prospective Clinical Evaluation of Monolithic and Partially Veneered Zirconia Single Crowns

Bömicke

Rammelsberg

Stober

et al. 2016

J Esthet Restor Dent

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Of these implant failures, 15 occurred before prosthesis insertion(Bömicke, Gabbert, Koob, Krisam, & Rammelsberg, 2017;Bonde et al, 2010;Malo et al, 2015;Spies, Stampf, et al, 2015), 44 after prosthesis insertion(Bergenblock et al, 2012;Cionca et al, 2015;Cooper et al, 2016;Guarnieri, Ceccherini, & Grande, 2015;Malo et al, 2015;Nejatidanesh, Moradpoor, & Savabi, 2016;Payer et al, 2015;Spies, Stampf, et al, 2015;Worni, Kolgeci, Rentsch-Kollar, Katsoulis, & Mericske- Stern, 2015;Worni et al, 2017), and four(Nothdurft, Nonhoff, & Pospiech, 2014;Payer et al, 2013; at undefined time points. Of these implant failures, 15 occurred before prosthesis insertion(Bömicke, Gabbert, Koob, Krisam, & Rammelsberg, 2017;Bonde et al, 2010;Malo et al, 2015;Spies, Stampf, et al, 2015), 44 after prosthesis insertion(Bergenblock et al, 2012;Cionca et al, 2015;Cooper et al, 2016;Guarnieri, Ceccherini, & Grande, 2015;Malo et al, 2015;Nejatidanesh, Moradpoor, & Savabi, 2016;Payer et al, 2015;Spies, Stampf, et al, 2015;Worni, Kolgeci, Rentsch-Kollar, Katsoulis, & Mericske- Stern, 2015;Worni et al, 2017), and four(Nothdurft, Nonhoff, & Pospiech, 2014;Payer et al, 2013; at undefined time points.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

The clinical performance of all‐ceramic implant‐supported single crowns: A systematic review and meta‐analysis

Rabel

Spies

Pieralli

et al. 2018

Clinical Oral Implants Res

109

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective This review aimed at evaluating the survival and technical complication rates of all‐ceramic implant‐supported single crowns (SC). Material and Methods Three electronic databases were searched for clinical studies conducted at ≥ 15 patients examining implant‐supported all‐ceramic SCs over ≥ 12 months. Survival rates of implants and restorations plus technical complication rates of SCs were calculated and tested for statistical correlation with confounding variables. Statistical analysis was performed using a negative binomial distribution model to calculate 5‐ and 10‐year survival and complication estimates. Results Forty‐one included studies reported on implant‐supported SCs made of veneered and monolithic high‐strength oxide ceramics, monolithic, and veneered glass‐based ceramics and of a monolithic resin‐nano‐ceramic (RNC). Survival estimates for SCs of 93% (95% CI: 86.6%–96.4%) after 5 years and 94.4% (95% CI: 91.1%–96.5%) after 10 years were calculated, corresponding values for implant survival were 95.3% (95% CI: 90.6%–97.7%) and 96.2% (95% CI: 95.1%–97.1%). Technical complication rates after 5/10 years were as follows: chipping 9.0% (95% CI: 5.4%–14.8%)/2.7% (95% CI: 2.1%–3.5%), framework fractures 1.9% (95% CI: 0.7%–4.9%)/1.2% (95% CI: 1%–1.5%), screw loosening 3.6% (95% CI: 1.6%–8.4%)/5.2% (95% CI: 3.6%–7.5%), and decementations with 1.1% (95% CI: 0.4%–2.8%) after 5 years. Some confounding variables influenced the above‐mentioned estimates significantly. Conclusions All‐ceramic implant‐supported SCs showed—with the exception of a RNC material—high survival rates. However, failures and technical complications occurred which have to be considered when informing patients on the treatment with implant‐supported all‐ceramic SCs.

show abstract

Clinical outcomes of zirconia-based implant- and tooth-supported single crowns

Abstract: The zirconia-based single crowns can be used clinically for tooth- and implant-supported restorations.

Cited by 41 publications

References 38 publications

All-ceramic, bi-layered crowns supported by zirconia implants: Three-year results of a prospective multicenter study

All-ceramic, bi-layered crowns supported by zirconia implants: Three-year results of a prospective multicenter study

Short‐Term Prospective Clinical Evaluation of Monolithic and Partially Veneered Zirconia Single Crowns

The clinical performance of all‐ceramic implant‐supported single crowns: A systematic review and meta‐analysis

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About