Cargando…

Prospective Clinical Evaluation of Posterior Third-Generation Monolithic Zirconia Crowns Fabricated with Complete Digital Workflow: Two-Year Follow-Up

Clinical studies on the behavior of posterior translucent monolithic zirconia restorations are lacking. We assessed the clinical outcome and survival rate of posterior third-generation monolithic zirconia crowns over a 2-year period. A total of 24 patients, requiring 30 posterior full-contour restor...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Gseibat, Mustafa, Sevilla, Pablo, Lopez-Suarez, Carlos, Rodríguez, Verónica, Peláez, Jesús, Suárez, María J.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: MDPI 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8780337/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35057389
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/ma15020672
_version_ 1784637812893548544
author Gseibat, Mustafa
Sevilla, Pablo
Lopez-Suarez, Carlos
Rodríguez, Verónica
Peláez, Jesús
Suárez, María J.
author_facet Gseibat, Mustafa
Sevilla, Pablo
Lopez-Suarez, Carlos
Rodríguez, Verónica
Peláez, Jesús
Suárez, María J.
author_sort Gseibat, Mustafa
collection PubMed
description Clinical studies on the behavior of posterior translucent monolithic zirconia restorations are lacking. We assessed the clinical outcome and survival rate of posterior third-generation monolithic zirconia crowns over a 2-year period. A total of 24 patients, requiring 30 posterior full-contour restorations were selected. All abutments were scanned, and crowns were milled and cemented with a self-adhesive dual cure cement. Crowns were assessed using the California Dental Association’s criteria. Gingival status was assessed by evaluating the gingival index, plaque index, periodontal probing depth of the abutments and control teeth, and the margin index of the abutment teeth. Statistical analyses were performed using the Friedman and the Wilcoxon signed-rank tests. During the 2-year follow-up, no biological or mechanical complications were observed, and the survival and success rate was 100%. All restorations ranked as satisfactory throughout the follow-up period. The gingival index and plaque index were worse at the end of the 2-year follow-up. The margin index was stable during the 2 years of clinical service. No significant differences were recorded in periodontal parameters between crowns and control teeth. Third-generation monolithic zirconia could be a reliable alternative to posterior metal–ceramic and second-generation monolithic zirconia posterior crowns.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8780337
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher MDPI
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-87803372022-01-22 Prospective Clinical Evaluation of Posterior Third-Generation Monolithic Zirconia Crowns Fabricated with Complete Digital Workflow: Two-Year Follow-Up Gseibat, Mustafa Sevilla, Pablo Lopez-Suarez, Carlos Rodríguez, Verónica Peláez, Jesús Suárez, María J. Materials (Basel) Article Clinical studies on the behavior of posterior translucent monolithic zirconia restorations are lacking. We assessed the clinical outcome and survival rate of posterior third-generation monolithic zirconia crowns over a 2-year period. A total of 24 patients, requiring 30 posterior full-contour restorations were selected. All abutments were scanned, and crowns were milled and cemented with a self-adhesive dual cure cement. Crowns were assessed using the California Dental Association’s criteria. Gingival status was assessed by evaluating the gingival index, plaque index, periodontal probing depth of the abutments and control teeth, and the margin index of the abutment teeth. Statistical analyses were performed using the Friedman and the Wilcoxon signed-rank tests. During the 2-year follow-up, no biological or mechanical complications were observed, and the survival and success rate was 100%. All restorations ranked as satisfactory throughout the follow-up period. The gingival index and plaque index were worse at the end of the 2-year follow-up. The margin index was stable during the 2 years of clinical service. No significant differences were recorded in periodontal parameters between crowns and control teeth. Third-generation monolithic zirconia could be a reliable alternative to posterior metal–ceramic and second-generation monolithic zirconia posterior crowns. MDPI 2022-01-17 /pmc/articles/PMC8780337/ /pubmed/35057389 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/ma15020672 Text en © 2022 by the authors. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
spellingShingle Article
Gseibat, Mustafa
Sevilla, Pablo
Lopez-Suarez, Carlos
Rodríguez, Verónica
Peláez, Jesús
Suárez, María J.
Prospective Clinical Evaluation of Posterior Third-Generation Monolithic Zirconia Crowns Fabricated with Complete Digital Workflow: Two-Year Follow-Up
title Prospective Clinical Evaluation of Posterior Third-Generation Monolithic Zirconia Crowns Fabricated with Complete Digital Workflow: Two-Year Follow-Up
title_full Prospective Clinical Evaluation of Posterior Third-Generation Monolithic Zirconia Crowns Fabricated with Complete Digital Workflow: Two-Year Follow-Up
title_fullStr Prospective Clinical Evaluation of Posterior Third-Generation Monolithic Zirconia Crowns Fabricated with Complete Digital Workflow: Two-Year Follow-Up
title_full_unstemmed Prospective Clinical Evaluation of Posterior Third-Generation Monolithic Zirconia Crowns Fabricated with Complete Digital Workflow: Two-Year Follow-Up
title_short Prospective Clinical Evaluation of Posterior Third-Generation Monolithic Zirconia Crowns Fabricated with Complete Digital Workflow: Two-Year Follow-Up
title_sort prospective clinical evaluation of posterior third-generation monolithic zirconia crowns fabricated with complete digital workflow: two-year follow-up
topic Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8780337/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35057389
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/ma15020672
work_keys_str_mv AT gseibatmustafa prospectiveclinicalevaluationofposteriorthirdgenerationmonolithiczirconiacrownsfabricatedwithcompletedigitalworkflowtwoyearfollowup
AT sevillapablo prospectiveclinicalevaluationofposteriorthirdgenerationmonolithiczirconiacrownsfabricatedwithcompletedigitalworkflowtwoyearfollowup
AT lopezsuarezcarlos prospectiveclinicalevaluationofposteriorthirdgenerationmonolithiczirconiacrownsfabricatedwithcompletedigitalworkflowtwoyearfollowup
AT rodriguezveronica prospectiveclinicalevaluationofposteriorthirdgenerationmonolithiczirconiacrownsfabricatedwithcompletedigitalworkflowtwoyearfollowup
AT pelaezjesus prospectiveclinicalevaluationofposteriorthirdgenerationmonolithiczirconiacrownsfabricatedwithcompletedigitalworkflowtwoyearfollowup
AT suarezmariaj prospectiveclinicalevaluationofposteriorthirdgenerationmonolithiczirconiacrownsfabricatedwithcompletedigitalworkflowtwoyearfollowup