Implant-supported single all-ceramic crowns made from prefabricated (stock) or individualized CAD/CAM zirconia abutments: A 5 year randomized clinical trial.

Wittneben, Julia-Gabriela; Abou-Ayash, Samir; Gashi, Ardian; Buser, Daniel; Belser, Urs; Brägger, Urs; Sailer, Irena; Gavric, Jelena (2024). Implant-supported single all-ceramic crowns made from prefabricated (stock) or individualized CAD/CAM zirconia abutments: A 5 year randomized clinical trial. Journal of esthetic and restorative dentistry, 36(1), pp. 164-173. Wiley 10.1111/jerd.13188

Text J_Esthet_Restor_Dent_-_2024_-_Wittneben_-_Implant_supported_single_all_ceramic_crowns_made_from_prefabricated_stock_or.pdf - Published Version Restricted to registered users only Available under License Publisher holds Copyright. Download (725kB)

AIM

The aim of this randomized, prospective, and clinical multicenter study was to compare the overall clinical performance of two restorative options over a 5-year period: individualized CAD/CAM abutments veneered with a hand-layered ceramic, and prefabricated zirconium dioxide abutments veneered with press ceramic and inserted into a single edentulous gap in the anterior maxilla.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Forty subjects were recruited from two universities: 20 from the University of XX and 20 from the University of XY. Each subject received an implant to restore a single edentulous gap in the maxillary anterior region (14-24 FDI). 20 patients were randomized into each Group. Group A received a one-piece single crown produced from a prefabricated zirconia abutment with pressed ceramic and Group B received an individualized CAD/CAM zirconia abutment with a hand-layered technique. After 5 years, the aesthetic and radiographic parameters were assessed.

RESULTS

Group A had four dropouts and one failure, resulting in a 95% survival rate and 95% success rate. Group B had two dropouts and two failures which resulted in a 90% survival rate and 90% success rate. No crestal bone level changes were observed, with a mean DIB of 0.06 mm in Group A and 0.09 mm in Group B. No statistically significant differences were present at baseline, 6 months, 1 year, 3 years, or 5 years for DIB values between time points and groups. Pink aesthetic score/white aesthetic score, Peri-Implant and Crown Index, and Implant Crown Aesthetic Index values were stable over time at all five points for both groups.

CONCLUSION

Both implant-supported restorative options represent a valuable treatment option for the restoration of implant crowns in the anterior maxilla.

CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE

In general, the use of ceramic abutments in the anterior zone represents a valuable treatment procedure with both standardized and CAD/CAM individualized abutments and following the recommendations from the respective manufacturer(s).

Interest & Impact

Downloads

1 since deposited on 05 Jan 2024
1 in the past 12 months

Citations

5 Citations in Web of Science ®
6 Citations in Scopus

Search

in Google Scholar™

Services

Actions (login required)

Edit item

Actions (login required)

Edit item