4.6 Article

10-year randomized trial (RCT) of zirconia-ceramic and metal-ceramic fixed dental prostheses

Journal

JOURNAL OF DENTISTRY
Volume 76, Issue -, Pages 32-39

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.jdent.2018.05.015

Keywords

Zirconia; All-ceramics; Metal-ceramic; FDP; Long-term; Technical; Biologic

Funding

  1. DeguDent GmbH, Dentspy Sirona, Germany

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Objectives: To monitor zirconia-ceramic and metal-ceramic posterior FDPs with respect to survival and technical/biological complication rates. Materials and methods: Fifty-eight patients received 76 3- to 5-unit posterior FDPs. The sites were randomly assigned to 40 zirconia-based (ZC) and 36 metal-based (MC) FDPs. FDPs were examined at baseline (cementation), at 6 months, at 1 year and then yearly up to 10 years. Technical outcomes were assessed using modified United States Public Health Service (USPHS) criteria. Biologic outcomes included probing depth, plaque, bleeding on probing and tooth vitality. Statistical analysis was performed applying Kaplan-Meier (KM) estimation, log-rank, Mann-Whitney and Fisher exact test. Results: During the 10-year follow-up thirteen patients (17 FDPs) dropped out and 6 FDPs in 6 patients (5 ZC,1 MC) were considered catastrophic failures for technical and/or biological reasons. Forty-four patients with 53 FDPs (29 ZC, 24 MC) were available for examination. The median observation period was 10.3 years (ZC) and 10.0 years (MC). The 10-year KM survival estimate of ZC FDPs was 91.3% (95%CI:69.5;97.8) and 100% of MC FDPs. Minor chipping of the veneering ceramic and occlusal wear were found to a similar extent at ZC and MC FDPs. ZC FDPs demonstrated a significantly higher rate of framework fracture, de-bonding, major fractures of the veneering ceramic and poor marginal adaption. Biological outcomes were similar in both groups and between abutment and control teeth. Conclusion: At 10 years, ZC and MC posterior FDPs resulted in similar outcomes for the majority of the outcome measures (p > 0.05).

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available