Clinical performance of posterior metal-free polymer crowns with and without fiber reinforcement: One-year results of a randomised clinical trial

ObjectivesThe aim of this study was to evaluate the clinical performance of posterior, metal-free polymer crowns with and without a glass-fiber framework, in comparison to metal–ceramic crowns.MethodsAfter randomisation, 80 single crowns, manufactured from a newly designed polymer composite, were set in posterior teeth. Half of these received a glass-fiber framework, while half were prepared without any framework stabilisation. All polymer crowns were adhesively luted with resin cement. As the control group, 40 conventional metal–ceramic crowns were inserted with hybrid cement. Documentation included failures and other complications, as well as gingival/plaque status and aesthetic performance.ResultsDuring the 12-month observation period, eight polymer crowns and three metal–ceramic crowns showed clinically relevant complications. The most frequent complications were root canal treatments (n = 4) and decementation (n = 4) of the crowns. A total of two crowns (one polymer crown with fiber network and one crown of the control group) had to be replaced.After 12 months, polymer crowns with glass-fiber framework exhibited significantly higher plaque accumulation (p = 0.005) and gingival index (p = 0.04) than metal–ceramic crowns, while no significant differences could be demonstrated for polymer crowns without fiber reinforcement.Postoperative sensibility and aesthetic performance did not differ significantly between the groups.ConclusionsWithin a 12-month observation period, posterior polymer crowns with and without glass-fiber framework demonstrated acceptable stability and aesthetic performance.Polymer crowns with fiber framework showed significant higher plaque accumulation and gingival index than metal–ceramic crowns.