Retrospective and clinical evaluation of retrievable, tooth-implant supported zirconia-ceramic restorations

Abstract

Objective. Permanent cementations of zirconia-ceramic restorations may conflict with the rationale for retrievability of implant-supported restorations. The aim of this study was to test the hypothesis that retrievable, tooth-implant supported FDPs made of veneered zirconia ceramic cores are a viable treatment alternative. Material and methods. Restorations of patients in private practice and dental clinic were evaluated by reviewing patient records retrospectively and performing a final clinical examination. Permanently cemented copings protected the tooth abutments. The zirconia-ceramic restorations were semi-permanently cemented to the copings and the implant abutments using acrylic-urethane cement. In addition to Kaplan-Meier analyses for complications, the effect of age, gender, signs of bruxism, jaw and number of units on complications was estimated using Cox regression analyses (significance p < 0.05). Results. The follow-up period for 23 patients (nine with signs of bruxism) with four anterior and 27 posterior zirconia-ceramic restorations (3–12 units) ranged from 12.7–47.9 months. Core fractures of two posterior prostheses in patients with signs of bruxism yielded a 40-month survival rate of 93.5%. There were 10 cohesive chippings within the veneering porcelain for seven patients (six patients with signs of bruxism), which resulted in 40-month chipping rates of 5.6% among non-bruxers and 100% among patients with signs of bruxism. The hazard ratio for signs of bruxism was 20 (95% confidence interval: 2.1–188.3, p = 0.009). Conclusions. Retrievable, tooth-implant supported restorations made of zirconia-ceramics should be used with caution because of some core fractures and a considerable number of minor veneer fractures. The fracture risk was very high among patients with signs of bruxism. Due to the low number of occasions for intentional retrievals, a recommendation to use semi-permanently cemented, all-ceramic FDPs would still be premature.

Key Words::

• all-ceramic
• dental implant
• failure
• fixed dental-
• prosthesis

Acknowledgment

This study was supported by a grant from the Deutsche Gesellschaft für Zahnärztliche Implantologie (DGZI) (German Association of Dental Implantology).

Declaration of interest: The authors report no conflicts of interest. The authors alone are responsible for the content and writing of the paper.