Literature DB >> 19486077

Randomized-controlled clinical trial of customized zirconia and titanium implant abutments for single-tooth implants in canine and posterior regions: 3-year results.

Anja Zembic1, Irena Sailer, Ronald Ernst Jung, Christoph Hans Franz Hämmerle.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: The aim was to test whether or not zirconia abutments exhibit the same survival and technical/biological outcome as titanium abutments.
MATERIAL AND METHODS: Twenty-two patients receiving 40 single-tooth implants in canine and posterior regions were included. The implant sites were randomly assigned to 20 zirconia and 20 titanium abutments. All-ceramic and metal-ceramic crowns were fabricated. At baseline, 6, 12 and 36 months, the reconstructions were examined for technical and biological problems. Probing pocket depth (PPD), plaque control record (PCR) and bleeding on probing (BOP) were assessed at abutments (test) and analogous contralateral teeth (control). Standardized radiographs of the implants were made and the bone level (BL) was measured referring to the implant shoulder on mesial (mBL) and distal sides (dBL). The difference of color (DeltaE) of the peri-implant mucosa and the gingiva of control teeth was assessed with a spectrophotometer. The data were statistically analyzed with Mann-Whitney Rank and Student's unpaired t-tests.
RESULTS: Eighteen patients with 18 zirconia and 10 titanium abutments were examined at a mean follow-up of 36 months (range 31.5-53.3 months). No fracture of an abutment or loss of a reconstruction was found. Hence, both exhibited 100% survival. At two metal-ceramic crowns supported by titanium abutments chipping of the veneering ceramic occurred. No difference of the biological outcome of zirconia and titanium abutments was observed: PPD (meanPPD(ZrO(2)) 3.2 +/- 1 mm, mPPD(Ti) 3.4 +/- 0.5 mm), PCR (mPCR(ZrO(2)) 0.1 +/- 0.2, mPCR(Ti) 0.1 +/- 0.2) and BOP (mBOP(ZrO(2)) 0.4 +/- 0.4, mBOP(Ti) 0.2 +/- 0.3). Furthermore, the BL was similar at implants supporting zirconia and titanium abutments (mBL(ZrO(2)) 1.7 +/- 1, dBL(ZrO(2)) 1.6 +/- 1; mBL(Ti) 2 +/- 1, dBL(Ti) 2.1 +/- 1). Both, zirconia and titanium abutments induced a similar amount of discoloration of the mucosa compared with the gingiva at natural teeth (DeltaE(ZrO(2)) 9.3 +/- 3.8, DeltaE(Ti) 6.8 +/- 3.8).
CONCLUSIONS: At 3 years, zirconia and titanium abutments exhibited same survival and technical, biological and esthetical outcomes.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2009        PMID: 19486077     DOI: 10.1111/j.1600-0501.2009.01717.x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Clin Oral Implants Res        ISSN: 0905-7161            Impact factor:   5.977


  31 in total

Review 1.  Mechanical resistance of zirconium implant abutments: a review of the literature.

Authors:  R Velázquez-Cayón; C Vaquero-Aguilar; D Torres-Lagares; M Jiménez-Melendo; J-L Gutiérrez-Pérez
Journal:  Med Oral Patol Oral Cir Bucal       Date:  2012-03-01

2.  Tooth-implant-supported posterior fixed dental prostheses with zirconia frameworks: 3-year clinical result.

Authors:  Florian Beuer; Caroline Sachs; Julian Groesser; Jan-Frederik Gueth; Michael Stimmelmayr
Journal:  Clin Oral Investig       Date:  2015-09-24       Impact factor: 3.573

Review 3.  WITHDRAWN: Interventions for replacing missing teeth: partially absent dentition.

Authors:  Elliot Abt; Alan B Carr; Helen V Worthington
Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev       Date:  2019-07-17

4.  Fracture behavior of straight or angulated zirconia implant abutments supporting anterior single crowns.

Authors:  Frank P Nothdurft; Klaus E Doppler; Kurt J Erdelt; Andreas W Knauber; Peter R Pospiech
Journal:  Clin Oral Investig       Date:  2010-01-19       Impact factor: 3.573

5.  Effect of different abutment materials (zirconia or titanium) on the crestal bone height in 1 year.

Authors:  Vinayak Bharate; Yogesh Kumar; Dheeraj Koli; Gunjan Pruthi; Veena Jain
Journal:  J Oral Biol Craniofac Res       Date:  2019-10-24

6.  Fracture resistance of three-unit zirconia fixed partial denture with modified framework.

Authors:  Arthur Partiyan; Essam Osman; Mohammad M Rayyan; Moustafa Aboushelib; Ahmed Ibrahim; Ryo Jimbo
Journal:  Odontology       Date:  2016-04-15       Impact factor: 2.634

7.  Surface alterations of zirconia and titanium substrates after Er,Cr:YSGG irradiation.

Authors:  Persio Vasconcelos Miranda; José Augusto Rodrigues; Alberto Blay; Jamil Awad Shibli; Alessandra Cassoni
Journal:  Lasers Med Sci       Date:  2014-01-16       Impact factor: 3.161

8.  Fracture behaviour of implant-implant- and implant-tooth-supported all-ceramic fixed dental prostheses utilising zirconium dioxide implant abutments.

Authors:  Frank Philipp Nothdurft; Sabine Merker; Peter Reinhard Pospiech
Journal:  Clin Oral Investig       Date:  2010-01-05       Impact factor: 3.573

9.  Soft Tissue Interface with Various Kinds of Implant Abutment Materials.

Authors:  Akihiro Furuhashi; Yasunori Ayukawa; Ikiru Atsuta; Yunia Dwi Rakhmatia; Kiyoshi Koyano
Journal:  J Clin Med       Date:  2021-05-28       Impact factor: 4.241

Review 10.  Oral Tissue Interactions and Cellular Response to Zirconia Implant-Prosthetic Components: A Critical Review.

Authors:  Marcel F Kunrath; Saurabh Gupta; Felice Lorusso; Antonio Scarano; Sammy Noumbissi
Journal:  Materials (Basel)       Date:  2021-05-25       Impact factor: 3.623

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.