Literature DB >> 25842099

All-ceramic or metal-ceramic tooth-supported fixed dental prostheses (FDPs)? A systematic review of the survival and complication rates. Part I: Single crowns (SCs).

Irena Sailer1, Nikolay Alexandrovich Makarov2, Daniel Stefan Thoma3, Marcel Zwahlen4, Bjarni Elvar Pjetursson5.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To assess the 5-year survival of metal-ceramic and all-ceramic tooth-supported single crowns (SCs) and to describe the incidence of biological, technical and esthetic complications.
METHODS: Medline (PubMed), Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) searches (2006-2013) were performed for clinical studies focusing on tooth-supported fixed dental prostheses (FDPs) with a mean follow-up of at least 3 years. This was complimented by an additional hand search and the inclusion of 34 studies from a previous systematic review [1,2]. Survival and complication rates were analyzed using robust Poisson's regression models to obtain summary estimates of 5-year proportions.
RESULTS: Sixty-seven studies reporting on 4663 metal-ceramic and 9434 all-ceramic SCs fulfilled the inclusion criteria. Seventeen studies reported on metal-ceramic crowns, and 54 studies reported on all-ceramic crowns. Meta-analysis of the included studies indicated an estimated survival rate of metal-ceramic SCs of 94.7% (95% CI: 94.1-96.9%) after 5 years. This was similar to the estimated 5-year survival rate of leucit or lithium-disilicate reinforced glass ceramic SCs (96.6%; 95% CI: 94.9-96.7%), of glass infiltrated alumina SCs (94.6%; 95% CI: 92.7-96%) and densely sintered alumina and zirconia SCs (96%; 95% CI: 93.8-97.5%; 92.1%; 95% CI: 82.8-95.6%). In contrast, the 5-year survival rates of feldspathic/silica-based ceramic crowns were lower (p<0.001). When the outcomes in anterior and posterior regions were compared feldspathic/silica-based ceramic and zirconia crowns exhibited significantly lower survival rates in the posterior region (p<0.0001), the other crown types performed similarly. Densely sintered zirconia SCs were more frequently lost due to veneering ceramic fractures than metal-ceramic SCs (p<0.001), and had significantly more loss of retention (p<0.001). In total higher 5 year rates of framework fracture were reported for the all-ceramic SCs than for metal-ceramic SCs.
CONCLUSIONS: Survival rates of most types of all-ceramic SCs were similar to those reported for metal-ceramic SCs, both in anterior and posterior regions. Weaker feldspathic/silica-based ceramics should be limited to applications in the anterior region. Zirconia-based SCs should not be considered as primary option due to their high incidence of technical problems.
Copyright © 2015 Academy of Dental Materials. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  All-ceramic; Biological complications; Complication rates; Failures; Longitudinal; Single crowns; Success; Survival; Systematic review; Technical complications

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2015        PMID: 25842099     DOI: 10.1016/j.dental.2015.02.011

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Dent Mater        ISSN: 0109-5641            Impact factor:   5.304


  81 in total

1.  Tooth substance removal for ceramic single crown materials-an in vitro comparison.

Authors:  Franz Sebastian Schwindling; Moritz Waldecker; Peter Rammelsberg; Stefan Rues; Wolfgang Bömicke
Journal:  Clin Oral Investig       Date:  2018-12-04       Impact factor: 3.573

2.  Approximate relative fatigue life estimation methods for thin-walled monolithic ceramic crowns.

Authors:  Sadia Nasrin; Noriko Katsube; Robert R Seghi; Stanislav I Rokhlin
Journal:  Dent Mater       Date:  2018-05       Impact factor: 5.304

3.  Influence of residual thermal stresses on the edge chipping resistance of PFM and veneered zirconia structures: Experimental and FEA study.

Authors:  Carina B Tanaka; Rafael Y Ballester; Grace M De Souza; Yu Zhang; Josete B C Meira
Journal:  Dent Mater       Date:  2018-12-20       Impact factor: 5.304

4.  Wear Behavior of Graded Glass/Zirconia Crowns and Their Antagonists.

Authors:  M R Kaizer; S Bano; M Borba; V Garg; M B F Dos Santos; Y Zhang
Journal:  J Dent Res       Date:  2019-02-11       Impact factor: 6.116

5.  Flexural strength and crystalline stability of a monolithic translucent zirconia subjected to grinding, polishing and thermal challenges.

Authors:  Raisa Hintz DE Souza; Marina R Kaizer; Carolina Elisa Pereira Borges; Ana Beatriz Franco Fernandes; Gisele Maria Correr; Alysson Nunes DiÓgenes; Yu Zhang; Carla Castiglia Gonzaga
Journal:  Ceram Int       Date:  2020-07-22       Impact factor: 4.527

6.  Radiographic periapical healing associated with root-treated teeth accessed through existing crowns: a historical controlled cohort study.

Authors:  Luis M Ferrández; Yuan-Ling Ng; John S Rhodes; Sarjoo S Mistry; Kishor Gulabivala
Journal:  Clin Oral Investig       Date:  2021-03-17       Impact factor: 3.573

7.  Survey on the use of CAD-CAM technology by UK and Irish dental technicians.

Authors:  E Blackwell; M Nesbit; H Petridis
Journal:  Br Dent J       Date:  2017-05-12       Impact factor: 1.626

8.  Clinical evaluation of zirconia-based all-ceramic single crowns: an up to 12-year retrospective cohort study.

Authors:  Shoko Miura; Shin Kasahara; Shinobu Yamauchi; Yayoi Okuyama; Akio Izumida; Jun Aida; Hiroshi Egusa
Journal:  Clin Oral Investig       Date:  2017-06-12       Impact factor: 3.573

9.  Clinical performance of screw-retained and cemented implant-supported zirconia single crowns: 36-month results.

Authors:  Claudio Cacaci; Friederike Cantner; Thomas Mücke; Peter Randelzhofer; Jan Hajtó; Florian Beuer
Journal:  Clin Oral Investig       Date:  2016-10-29       Impact factor: 3.573

10.  Survey of UK dentists regarding the use of CAD/CAM technology.

Authors:  D Tran; M Nesbit; H Petridis
Journal:  Br Dent J       Date:  2016-11-18       Impact factor: 1.626

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.