Prosthetic outcomes and clinical performance of CAD‐CAM monolithic zirconia versus porcelain‐fused‐to‐metal implant crowns in the molar region: 1‐year results of a RCT

Abstract

Objective To investigate the clinical performance of monolithic zirconia implant crowns as compared to porcelain‐fused‐to‐metal (PFM) implant crowns. Materials and methods Seventy‐six healthy patients received reduced diameter implants in the molar region. Following random allocation, either a monolithic zirconia crown (Mono‐ZrO2) or a (PFM) was inserted. Crown and implant survival rates, modified USPHS criteria, clinical measurements, and interproximal marginal bone level (MBL) were assessed at crown delivery (baseline, BL) and at the 1‐year follow‐up (1y‐FU). Data were analyzed descriptively. Fisher's exact test and Wilcoxon rank sum test were applied for statistical analysis. The level of statistical significance was set at p < .05. Results Thirty‐nine Mono‐ZrO2 and 37 PFM crowns were delivered. At the 1y‐FU, one crown in each group was lost due to loss of the implant. Technical complications occurred in the PFM group and were limited to four minor ceramic chippings resulting in a total technical complication rate of 11.1% (p = .024). Anatomical form and color match compared to the adjacent dentition were rated significantly inferior for the Mono‐ZrO2 crowns. Patient satisfaction was high in both groups at BL (34 Mono‐ZrO2 34 PFM) and at 1y‐FU (36 Mono‐ZrO2 31 PFM). No significant differences between the groups were detected with respect to the change in MBL and to the soft tissue parameters. Conclusions Monolithic zirconia crowns are a similarly successful alternative option to PFM crowns for restoring single implants in the posterior area.

Endocrowns Clinical Performance and Patient Satisfaction: A Randomized Clinical Trial of Three Monolithic Ceramic Restorations

“…Some studies showed less patient satisfaction with monolithic zirconia when compared to bi-layered zirconia restorations, 41 while other studies reported a high satisfaction with monolithic zirconia crowns. 33,42 Color match was rated excellent in other studies investigating Enamic partial restorations. 10,43 The patients were scheduled for annual follow-up appointments and the outcome will be reported in due course.…”

Effect of tooth brush abrasion on the color, gloss and surface roughness of internally and externally stained monolithic ceramic materials

“…[4,5] The esthetic outcomes of monolithic zirconia crowns, however, were rated inferior compared to conventionally veneered restorations. [6] Therefore, custom staining and glazing of monolithic ceramic restorations is recommended to provide monolithic restorations mimicking the natural dentition. [7] The esthetic properties of dental restorations need to be maintained long-term.…”

Bond strength between a veneering composite resin and zirconia frameworks with attached mechanical retentive devices

“…These include overpressing 4) , the use of veneering indirect composite resin 5) , and employing a monolithic structure for zirconia restorations 6) . Monolithic zirconia restorations are prevalent in fixed prostheses owing to their advantages of lower frequency of porcelain chipping, preservation of the tooth structure, and low cost 7) . However, medium-and long-term clinical outcomes are still limited 2,7) .…”

“…Monolithic zirconia restorations are prevalent in fixed prostheses owing to their advantages of lower frequency of porcelain chipping, preservation of the tooth structure, and low cost 7) . However, medium-and long-term clinical outcomes are still limited 2,7) .…”