Comparison of technical, biological, and esthetic parameters of ceramic and metal-ceramic implant-supported fixed dental prostheses : A systematic review and meta-analysis
Copyright © 2019 Editorial Council for the Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved..
STATEMENT OF PROBLEM: Differences between ceramic and metal-ceramic implant-supported fixed dental prostheses are unclear.
PURPOSE: The purpose of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to compare the technical, biological, and esthetic complication rates of implant-supported ceramic and metal-ceramic restorations.
MATERIAL AND METHODS: Six databases were searched to identify randomized controlled clinical trials (RCTs) and prospective and retrospective cohort studies of implant-supported fixed dental prostheses. The survival rate, marginal adaptation, marginal bone loss, pocket probing depth, crown color match, and mucosal discoloration of ceramic and metal-ceramic single crowns were assessed. For implant-supported fixed partial dental prostheses (FPDPs), only the survival rate was assessed. The risk of bias was assessed for individual studies and across studies by using the Cochrane guidelines, Newcastle-Ottawa scale, and funnel plots.
RESULTS: Twenty studies were included in this meta-analysis. Ceramic and metal-ceramic implant-supported single crowns were compared in terms of the survival rate (OR=0.84 [0.32, 2.23], P=.730), marginal adaptation (mean difference [MD]=0.33 [0.19, 0.47], P<.001), marginal bone loss (MD=-0.03 [-0.07, 0.02], P=.260), pocket probing depth (MD=-0.07 [-0.14, 0.00], P=.060), crown color match (MD=-0.15 [-0.29, 0.00], P=.040), and mucosal discoloration (standardized mean difference [SMD]=-0.14 [-0.86, 0.58], P=.710). The survival rate of ceramic and metal-ceramic implant-supported FPDPs was also compared (odds ratio [OR]=1.92 [1.26, 2.94], P=.003).
CONCLUSIONS: No significant difference was observed between ceramic and metal-ceramic implant-supported single crowns in terms of the survival rate, marginal bone loss, pocket probing depth, or mucosal discoloration. However, metal-ceramic single crowns had better marginal adaptation and poorer crown color match than did ceramic single crowns. In addition, current evidence indicates that metal-ceramic implant-supported FPDPs might have a higher survival rate than ceramic FPDPs.
| Errataetall: |
CommentIn: Evid Based Dent. 2021 Jan;22(3):100-101. - PMID 34561659 |
|---|---|
| Medienart: |
E-Artikel |
| Erscheinungsjahr: |
2020 |
|---|---|
| Erschienen: |
2020 |
| Enthalten in: |
Zur Gesamtaufnahme - volume:124 |
|---|---|
| Enthalten in: |
The Journal of prosthetic dentistry - 124(2020), 1 vom: 14. Juli, Seite 26-35.e2 |
| Sprache: |
Englisch |
|---|
| Beteiligte Personen: |
Hu, Meng-Long [VerfasserIn] |
|---|
| Links: |
|---|
| Themen: |
Dental Implants |
|---|
| Anmerkungen: |
Date Completed 07.07.2020 Date Revised 31.05.2022 published: Print-Electronic CommentIn: Evid Based Dent. 2021 Jan;22(3):100-101. - PMID 34561659 Citation Status MEDLINE |
|---|
| doi: |
10.1016/j.prosdent.2019.07.008 |
|---|
| funding: |
|
|---|---|
| Förderinstitution / Projekttitel: |
|
| PPN (Katalog-ID): |
NLM303560835 |
|---|
| LEADER | 01000naa a22002652 4500 | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| 001 | NLM303560835 | ||
| 003 | DE-627 | ||
| 005 | 20231225113101.0 | ||
| 007 | cr uuu---uuuuu | ||
| 008 | 231225s2020 xx |||||o 00| ||eng c | ||
| 024 | 7 | |a 10.1016/j.prosdent.2019.07.008 |2 doi | |
| 028 | 5 | 2 | |a pubmed24n1011.xml |
| 035 | |a (DE-627)NLM303560835 | ||
| 035 | |a (NLM)31753461 | ||
| 035 | |a (PII)S0022-3913(19)30484-6 | ||
| 040 | |a DE-627 |b ger |c DE-627 |e rakwb | ||
| 041 | |a eng | ||
| 100 | 1 | |a Hu, Meng-Long |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 245 | 1 | 0 | |a Comparison of technical, biological, and esthetic parameters of ceramic and metal-ceramic implant-supported fixed dental prostheses |b A systematic review and meta-analysis |
| 264 | 1 | |c 2020 | |
| 336 | |a Text |b txt |2 rdacontent | ||
| 337 | |a ƒaComputermedien |b c |2 rdamedia | ||
| 338 | |a ƒa Online-Ressource |b cr |2 rdacarrier | ||
| 500 | |a Date Completed 07.07.2020 | ||
| 500 | |a Date Revised 31.05.2022 | ||
| 500 | |a published: Print-Electronic | ||
| 500 | |a CommentIn: Evid Based Dent. 2021 Jan;22(3):100-101. - PMID 34561659 | ||
| 500 | |a Citation Status MEDLINE | ||
| 520 | |a Copyright © 2019 Editorial Council for the Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved. | ||
| 520 | |a STATEMENT OF PROBLEM: Differences between ceramic and metal-ceramic implant-supported fixed dental prostheses are unclear | ||
| 520 | |a PURPOSE: The purpose of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to compare the technical, biological, and esthetic complication rates of implant-supported ceramic and metal-ceramic restorations | ||
| 520 | |a MATERIAL AND METHODS: Six databases were searched to identify randomized controlled clinical trials (RCTs) and prospective and retrospective cohort studies of implant-supported fixed dental prostheses. The survival rate, marginal adaptation, marginal bone loss, pocket probing depth, crown color match, and mucosal discoloration of ceramic and metal-ceramic single crowns were assessed. For implant-supported fixed partial dental prostheses (FPDPs), only the survival rate was assessed. The risk of bias was assessed for individual studies and across studies by using the Cochrane guidelines, Newcastle-Ottawa scale, and funnel plots | ||
| 520 | |a RESULTS: Twenty studies were included in this meta-analysis. Ceramic and metal-ceramic implant-supported single crowns were compared in terms of the survival rate (OR=0.84 [0.32, 2.23], P=.730), marginal adaptation (mean difference [MD]=0.33 [0.19, 0.47], P<.001), marginal bone loss (MD=-0.03 [-0.07, 0.02], P=.260), pocket probing depth (MD=-0.07 [-0.14, 0.00], P=.060), crown color match (MD=-0.15 [-0.29, 0.00], P=.040), and mucosal discoloration (standardized mean difference [SMD]=-0.14 [-0.86, 0.58], P=.710). The survival rate of ceramic and metal-ceramic implant-supported FPDPs was also compared (odds ratio [OR]=1.92 [1.26, 2.94], P=.003) | ||
| 520 | |a CONCLUSIONS: No significant difference was observed between ceramic and metal-ceramic implant-supported single crowns in terms of the survival rate, marginal bone loss, pocket probing depth, or mucosal discoloration. However, metal-ceramic single crowns had better marginal adaptation and poorer crown color match than did ceramic single crowns. In addition, current evidence indicates that metal-ceramic implant-supported FPDPs might have a higher survival rate than ceramic FPDPs | ||
| 650 | 4 | |a Journal Article | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Meta-Analysis | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Systematic Review | |
| 650 | 7 | |a Dental Implants |2 NLM | |
| 650 | 7 | |a Metals |2 NLM | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Lin, Hong |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Zhang, You-Dong |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Han, Jian-Min |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 773 | 0 | 8 | |i Enthalten in |t The Journal of prosthetic dentistry |d 1951 |g 124(2020), 1 vom: 14. Juli, Seite 26-35.e2 |w (DE-627)NLM000092541 |x 1097-6841 |7 nnns |
| 773 | 1 | 8 | |g volume:124 |g year:2020 |g number:1 |g day:14 |g month:07 |g pages:26-35.e2 |
| 856 | 4 | 0 | |u http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.prosdent.2019.07.008 |3 Volltext |
| 912 | |a GBV_USEFLAG_A | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_NLM | ||
| 951 | |a AR | ||
| 952 | |d 124 |j 2020 |e 1 |b 14 |c 07 |h 26-35.e2 | ||