Back to Search Start Over

Systematic review evaluating the influence of the prosthetic material and prosthetic design on the clinical outcomes of implant-supported multi-unit fixed dental prosthesis in the posterior area.

Authors :
Pjetursson BE
Sailer I
Merino-Higuera E
Spies BC
Burkhardt F
Karasan D
Source :
Clinical oral implants research [Clin Oral Implants Res] 2023 Sep; Vol. 34 Suppl 26, pp. 86-103.
Publication Year :
2023

Abstract

Objective: The objectives of the study were to assess the survival, failure, and technical complication rates of implant-supported fixed dental prosthesis (iFDPs) with pontic or splinted crown (iS <subscript>p</subscript> C) designs in the posterior area and compare the influence of prosthetic materials and prosthetic design on the outcomes.<br />Methods: Electronic and manual searches were performed to identify randomized-, prospective-, and retrospective clinical trials with follow-up time of ≥12 months, evaluating the clinical outcomes of posterior iFDPs with pontic or iS <subscript>p</subscript> Cs. Survival and complication rates were analyzed using robust Poisson's regression models.<br />Results: Thirty-two studies reporting on 42 study arms were included in the present systematic review. The meta-analysis of the included studies indicated estimated 3-year survival rates of 98.3% (95%CI: 95.6-99.3%) for porcelain-fused-to-metal (PFM) iFDPs, 97.5% (95%CI: 95.5-98.7%) for veneered zirconia (Zr) iFDPs with pontic, 98.9% (95%CI: 96.8-99.6%) for monolithic or micro-veneered zirconia iFDPs with pontic, and 97.0% (95%CI: 84.8-99.9%) for lithium disilicate iFDPs with pontics. The survival rates for different material combination showed no statistically significant differences. Veneered restorations, overall, showed significantly (p < .01) higher ceramic fracture and chipping rates compared with monolithic restorations. Furthermore, there was no significant difference in survival rates (98.3% [95%CI: 95.6-99.3%] vs. 99.1% [95%CI: 97.6-99.7%]) and overall complication rates between PFM iFDPs with pontic and PFM iS <subscript>p</subscript> Cs.<br />Conclusions: Based on the data identified by this systematic review, PFM, veneered Zr, and monolithic Zr iFDPs with pontic and iS <subscript>p</subscript> Cs showed similarly high short-term survival rates in the posterior area. Veneered restorations exhibit ceramic chipping more often than monolithic restorations, with the highest fracture rate reported for veneered Zr iFDPs.<br /> (© 2023 John Wiley & Sons A/S. Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Details

Language :
English
ISSN :
1600-0501
Volume :
34 Suppl 26
Database :
MEDLINE
Journal :
Clinical oral implants research
Publication Type :
Academic Journal
Accession number :
37750526
Full Text :
https://doi.org/10.1111/clr.14103