4.5 Article

Five-year prospective clinical study of posterior three-unit zirconia-based fixed dental prostheses

期刊

CLINICAL ORAL INVESTIGATIONS
卷 16, 期 3, 页码 977-985

出版社

SPRINGER HEIDELBERG
DOI: 10.1007/s00784-011-0575-2

关键词

Zirconia; All ceramic; Prosthodontics; Fixed dental prostheses (FDPs)

资金

  1. Nobel Biocare

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This prospective clinical trial aimed at evaluating the clinical performance of three-unit posterior zirconia fixed dental prostheses (FDPs) after 5 years of clinical function. Thirty-seven patients received 48 three-unit zirconia-based FDPs. The restorations replaced either a premolar or a molar. Specific inclusion criteria were needed. Tooth preparation was standardized. Computer-aided design/computer-assisted manufacturing frameworks with a 9-mm(2) cross section of the connector and a 0.6-mm minimum thickness of the retainer were made. The restorations were luted with resin cement. The patients were recalled after 1, 6, 12, 24, 36, 48, and 60 months. The survival and success of the ceramics and zirconia were evaluated. The technical and aesthetic outcomes were examined using the United States Public Health Service criteria. The biologic outcomes were analyzed at abutment and contralateral teeth. Descriptive statistics were performed. All FDPs completed the study, resulting in 100% cumulative survival rate and 91.9% and 95.4% cumulative success rates for patients wearing one and two FDPs, respectively. No losses of retention were recorded. Forty-two restorations were rated alpha in all measured parameters. A minor chipping of the ceramics was detected in three restorations. No significant differences between the periodontal parameters of the test and control teeth were observed. Five-year clinical results proved that three-unit posterior zirconia-based FDPs were successful in the medium term for both function and aesthetic. Zirconia can be considered a promising substitute of metal frameworks for the fabrication of short-span posterior prostheses.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据