کد مقاله | کد نشریه | سال انتشار | مقاله انگلیسی | نسخه تمام متن |
---|---|---|---|---|
1420655 | 986378 | 2015 | 21 صفحه PDF | دانلود رایگان |
ObjectiveTo assess the 5-year survival of metal-ceramic and all-ceramic tooth-supported single crowns (SCs) and to describe the incidence of biological, technical and esthetic complications.MethodsMedline (PubMed), Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) searches (2006–2013) were performed for clinical studies focusing on tooth-supported fixed dental prostheses (FDPs) with a mean follow-up of at least 3 years. This was complimented by an additional hand search and the inclusion of 34 studies from a previous systematic review [1] and [2]. Survival and complication rates were analyzed using robust Poisson's regression models to obtain summary estimates of 5-year proportions.ResultsSixty-seven studies reporting on 4663 metal-ceramic and 9434 all-ceramic SCs fulfilled the inclusion criteria. Seventeen studies reported on metal-ceramic crowns, and 54 studies reported on all-ceramic crowns. Meta-analysis of the included studies indicated an estimated survival rate of metal-ceramic SCs of 94.7% (95% CI: 94.1–96.9%) after 5 years. This was similar to the estimated 5-year survival rate of leucit or lithium-disilicate reinforced glass ceramic SCs (96.6%; 95% CI: 94.9–96.7%), of glass infiltrated alumina SCs (94.6%; 95% CI: 92.7–96%) and densely sintered alumina and zirconia SCs (96%; 95% CI: 93.8–97.5%; 92.1%; 95% CI: 82.8–95.6%). In contrast, the 5-year survival rates of feldspathic/silica-based ceramic crowns were lower (p < 0.001). When the outcomes in anterior and posterior regions were compared feldspathic/silica-based ceramic and zirconia crowns exhibited significantly lower survival rates in the posterior region (p < 0.0001), the other crown types performed similarly. Densely sintered zirconia SCs were more frequently lost due to veneering ceramic fractures than metal-ceramic SCs (p < 0.001), and had significantly more loss of retention (p < 0.001). In total higher 5 year rates of framework fracture were reported for the all-ceramic SCs than for metal-ceramic SCs.ConclusionsSurvival rates of most types of all-ceramic SCs were similar to those reported for metal-ceramic SCs, both in anterior and posterior regions. Weaker feldspathic/silica-based ceramics should be limited to applications in the anterior region. Zirconia-based SCs should not be considered as primary option due to their high incidence of technical problems.
Journal: Dental Materials - Volume 31, Issue 6, June 2015, Pages 603–623