Evaluating the clinical behavior of veneered zirconia in comparison with monolithic zirconia complete arch implant-supported prostheses: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Sara Martakoush-Saleh; Angel-Orión Salgado-Peralvo; Juan-Francisco Peña-Cardelles; Naresh Kewalramani; German O Gallucci

doi:10.1016/j.prosdent.2023.07.021

Evaluating the clinical behavior of veneered zirconia in comparison with monolithic zirconia complete arch implant-supported prostheses: A systematic review and meta-analysis

J Prosthet Dent. 2023 Aug 9:S0022-3913(23)00497-3. doi: 10.1016/j.prosdent.2023.07.021. Online ahead of print.

Authors

Sara Martakoush-Saleh¹, Angel-Orión Salgado-Peralvo², Juan-Francisco Peña-Cardelles³, Naresh Kewalramani⁴, German O Gallucci⁵

Affiliations

¹ Postgraduate student, Department of Dental Clinical Specialties, Complutense University of Madrid, Spain.
² Professor, Department of Dental Clinical Specialties, Faculty of Odontology, Complutense University of Madrid, Spain. Electronic address: angelors@ucm.es.
³ Professor, Department of Restorative Dentistry and Biomaterials Sciences, Harvard School of Dental Medicine, Boston, Mass.
⁴ Professor, Department of Nursery and Stomatology, Faculty of Dentistry, Rey Juan Carlos University, Madrid, Spain.
⁵ Professor and Department Chair, Department of Restorative Dentistry and Biomaterials Sciences, Harvard School of Dental Medicine, Boston, Mass.

PMID: 37696747
DOI: 10.1016/j.prosdent.2023.07.021

Abstract

Statement of problem: Because the use of zirconia in dentistry is relatively new, the number of published studies on the subject is scarce, even though material selection is an important factor in clinical performance. Therefore, a systematic assessment of the impact of the prosthetic material, framework design, veneering material, and manufacturing process is required.

Purpose: The purpose of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to investigate the survival and success rates of feldspathic porcelain veneered zirconia (VZir) in comparison with monolithic zirconia (MZir) complete arch implant-supported prostheses (CAISPs). A secondary objective was to assess the influence of the type of loading, the presence or absence of a cantilever, the type of zirconia used, the location, and the opposing arch on complications rates and patient satisfaction.

Material and methods: An electronic search of the MEDLINE database (via PubMed), Scopus, Science Direct, Cochrane Library, and OpenGrey was carried out. The criteria described in the preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses statement were used. The search was restricted from January 2000 to January 2022.

Results: The systematic search resulted in 20 articles that met the established criteria. In total, 751 patients (VZir=302; MZir=449) with 3038 CAISPs (VZir=368; MZir=2670) were analyzed. Higher prosthetic survival and success rates were found in MZir compared with VZir CAISPs (100% and 95.45%, respectively). The meta-analysis found significantly fewer complications related to MZir (9.4% [4.8%-14.1%]) compared with VZir (33.7% [17.5%-49.9%]).

Conclusions: Based on the findings of this systematic review, MZir CAISPs had higher survival and success rates than VZir CAISPs, with significantly fewer prosthetic complications. The influence of factors such as the type of functional loading, the presence of a cantilever, the material used in the prosthodontic workflow, the location of the CAISP, and the type of antagonist arch on the performance of Zir CAISPs remains unclear.

Publication types

Review