Comparative Assessment of the Functional Parameters for Metal-Ceramic and All-Ceramic Teeth Restorations in Prosthetic Dentistry—A Literature Review

SIMPLE SUMMARY: In the last decades, the science and technology of all-ceramic teeth restorations witnessed the fastest-growing field of restorative materials in research and development for fixed prosthodontics. Due to their properties, characterized by a high level of biocompatibility, excellent optical properties, and high fracture resistance, all-ceramic material can also be used in the posterior areas of the dental arches. However, metal-ceramic fixed partial dentures are still perceived as the golden standard for those restorations, thanks to the positive clinical outcomes. Irrespective of the materials of which fixed partial dentures are performed, their success rates depend on the expected outcome and on how they perform in the oral environment. Such conditions of failure restorations may include biological factors (i.e., secondary decay, loss of vitality, periodontal disease, or abutment fracture) or technical factors (i.e., chipping, ceramic fracture, framework fracture, or loss of retention). Our aim is to provide the current evidence for the efficacy of metal-ceramics and all-ceramics in the treatment of multiple posterior edentulous spaces. Moreover, we aim to compare the survival rates of metal-ceramic and all-ceramic fixed partial dentures in terms of functionality and biocompatibility in all the aforementioned clinical situations. Our results have shown that all all-ceramic systems, especially densely sintered zirconia and reinforced glass ceramics, have a promising future to satisfy both practitioners and patients. However, technical and biological complications need to be taken into account when planning multi-unit fixed partial dentures for the posterior areas. ABSTRACT: The metal-ceramic fixed partial prosthesis is the golden standard for posterior tooth restorations. Following the demands of patients and clinicians for metal-free restorations, all-ceramic materials were developed as they offer an adequate alternative with better optical qualities and good mechanical properties. This study aims to carry out a bibliographic review to assess the survival rate and the biological and technical complications of all-ceramic and metal-ceramic fixed partial dentures. An electronic search for articles in the English language literature was performed using PubMed (MEDLINE). This literature review focused on research studies between 2010 and 2020 that performed clinical studies on tooth-supported fixed partial dentures with a mean follow-up of at least 3 years. All the studies, which analyzed the survival and complications of tooth-supported fixed partial dentures, were included. Thus, 14 studies reporting on 756 all-ceramic and 160 metal-ceramic fixed partial dentures met the inclusion criteria. A comparative analysis was carried out based on all the data existing in the studies included in this review. The metal-ceramic fixed partial dentures showed survival rates of 95% to 100% at 3-, 5-, and 10-year follow-up periods. Zirconia fixed partial dentures were reported to have survival rates of 81% to 100% at 3-, 5-, 9-, 10-year follow-up evaluations. The reinforced glass-ceramic fixed partial dentures showed survival rates of 70% to 93.35% at 5 years, while the alumina FPDs showed a survival rate of 68% at 3 years follow-up. The incidence of caries and loss of vitality were reported as higher for all-ceramic prostheses as compared to the metal-ceramic ones. A significant framework fracture was reported for glass-infiltrated alumina fixed partial dentures in comparison to metal-ceramic fixed partial dentures. All-ceramic and metal-ceramic restorations showed similar survival rates after 3 years, although all-ceramic restorations have problems with technical complications such as chipping, which can lead to framework fractures over time.