OBJECTIVES: This systematic review was performed to determine the main cause of technical failure of tooth-supported zirconia crowns and fixed partial dentures (FPDs), categorizing them as fracture/chipping or loss of retention/decementation. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Electronic and manual searches were performed for randomized clinical trials, prospective clinical trials, and prospective cohort studies that reported the technical failure rates of zirconia restorations. The Cochrane Collaboration risk-of-bias tool and Newcastle-Ottawa scale were used to assess the quality of the studies. RESULTS: Fifty-two studies were included and most of them had unclear risk of bias. Considering all reported fractures/chipping, for veneered crowns with 1 to 3 years of follow-up, the relative risk (RR) of fracture in relation to loss or retention was 3.95 (95% CI 1.18-13.23; p = 0.03). For 4 to 6 years of follow-up, the RR was 5.44 (95% CI 1.41-20.92; p = 0.01). For veneered FPDs with 1 to 3 years of follow-up, the RR was 5.98 (95% CI 2.31-15.01; p = 0.0002). For 4 to 6 years of follow-up, the RR was 3.70 (95% CI 1.63-8.41; p = 0.002). For 7 years or more of follow-up, the RR was 3.45 (95% CI 1.84-6.46; p = 0.0001). When only framework fractures were considered, there were no significant differences for the RR in all follow-up periods (p > 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Higher RR for fracture/chipping in relation to decementation for veneered zirconia crowns and FPDs at all follow-up times. For framework fractures, no difference was observed between the risk of failure of the restoration due to fracture or decementation. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Zirconia crowns and FPDs showed relatively high success and survival rates. However, considering the technical failures, there is approximately four times higher chance of fracture/chipping than loss of retention for both single and multi-unit tooth-supported veneered zirconia restorations.
OBJECTIVES: This systematic review was performed to determine the main cause of technical failure of tooth-supported zirconia crowns and fixed partial dentures (FPDs), categorizing them as fracture/chipping or loss of retention/decementation. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Electronic and manual searches were performed for randomized clinical trials, prospective clinical trials, and prospective cohort studies that reported the technical failure rates of zirconia restorations. The Cochrane Collaboration risk-of-bias tool and Newcastle-Ottawa scale were used to assess the quality of the studies. RESULTS: Fifty-two studies were included and most of them had unclear risk of bias. Considering all reported fractures/chipping, for veneered crowns with 1 to 3 years of follow-up, the relative risk (RR) of fracture in relation to loss or retention was 3.95 (95% CI 1.18-13.23; p = 0.03). For 4 to 6 years of follow-up, the RR was 5.44 (95% CI 1.41-20.92; p = 0.01). For veneered FPDs with 1 to 3 years of follow-up, the RR was 5.98 (95% CI 2.31-15.01; p = 0.0002). For 4 to 6 years of follow-up, the RR was 3.70 (95% CI 1.63-8.41; p = 0.002). For 7 years or more of follow-up, the RR was 3.45 (95% CI 1.84-6.46; p = 0.0001). When only framework fractures were considered, there were no significant differences for the RR in all follow-up periods (p > 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Higher RR for fracture/chipping in relation to decementation for veneered zirconia crowns and FPDs at all follow-up times. For framework fractures, no difference was observed between the risk of failure of the restoration due to fracture or decementation. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Zirconia crowns and FPDs showed relatively high success and survival rates. However, considering the technical failures, there is approximately four times higher chance of fracture/chipping than loss of retention for both single and multi-unit tooth-supported veneered zirconia restorations.
Authors: Irena Sailer; Nikolay Alexandrovich Makarov; Daniel Stefan Thoma; Marcel Zwahlen; Bjarni Elvar Pjetursson Journal: Dent Mater Date: 2015-04-02 Impact factor: 5.304
Authors: Bjarni Elvar Pjetursson; Irena Sailer; Nikolay Alexandrovich Makarov; Marcel Zwahlen; Daniel Stefan Thoma Journal: Dent Mater Date: 2015-04-30 Impact factor: 5.304