AI Article Synopsis
- Monolithic zirconia is noted for its strong mechanical and biological properties, but there's limited clinical evidence on its effectiveness compared to metal-ceramic prostheses in implant-supported crowns.
- The study examined peri-implant bone changes in 224 participants with either metal-ceramic or monolithic zirconia single crowns over an average follow-up period of 30.4 months, with various clinical outcomes measured.
- Results showed that while plaque levels were higher in the metal-ceramic group, there were no significant differences in bone levels or other clinical outcomes between the two groups, indicating comparable performance.
Article Abstract
Statement Of Problem: Monolithic zirconia has excellent mechanical and biologic properties. However, evidence of the clinical properties of implant-supported monolithic zirconia prostheses is limited.
Purpose: The purpose of this retrospective clinical study was to compare the peri-implant marginal bone changes of metal-ceramic and monolithic zirconia single crowns in the posterior region after prosthetic loading.
Material And Methods: A total of 224 participants treated with 327 implants restored with either metal-ceramic or monolithic zirconia single crowns in the posterior region between 2012 and 2016 were included in this study. Clinical outcomes, including the plaque index, peri-implant probing depth, and bleeding on probing, were recorded, and the marginal bone level was recorded by using the panoramic radiographs obtained at implant placement, second-stage surgery, and the most recent follow-up visit. The included parameters were analyzed with the nonparametric Mann-Whitney tests (α=.05).
Results: The mean follow-up time was 30.4 months, and the cumulative survival rate of implants was 100% and that of the prostheses was 99.1%. The plaque index was 0.46 in the metal-ceramic group, which was significantly higher (P<.05) than 0.37 in the monolithic zirconia group. However, no significant differences (P>.05) were observed in peri-implant probing depth and bleeding on probing between the 2 groups. The marginal bone level at implant placement, second-stage surgery, and the most recent follow-up visit was above the implant platform in both the metal-ceramic and monolithic zirconia groups. The marginal bone changes of the metal-ceramic group was 0.31 mm in the healing period and 0.38 mm in the prosthetic loading period, while in the monolithic zirconia group, it was 0.25 mm in the healing period and 0.43 mm in the prosthetic loading period; no significant differences (P>.05) were observed between the 2 groups.
Conclusions: The peri-implant marginal bone level change was comparable after prosthetic loading for metal-ceramic and monolithic zirconia single crowns, although monolithic zirconia was associated with reduced plaque.
Download full-text PDF |
Source |
|---|---|
| http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.prosdent.2020.12.010 | DOI Listing |
Publication Analysis
Top Keywords
Similar Publications
Want AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?
Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!