[Clinical outcome of single posterior implant-supported monolithic zirconia crowns fabricated using full digital workflow and conventional workflow: a 3-year follow-up].
S H Gao,D N Guo,Y S Zhou,S X Pan
DOI: https://doi.org/10.3760/cma.j.cn112144-20211015-00466
2022-01-01
Abstract: To compare the clinical performance of posterior single implant-supported monolithic zirconia crowns fabricated by full digital workflow and that of those fabricated by conventional workflow. This is prospective clinical research. Thirty-five patients who participated in a previous study during August 2017 to October 2018 at Department of Prosthodontics, Peking University School and Hospital of Stomatology were included in this 3-year follow-up study. The 35 patients, 17 females and 18 males, aged (49.0±15.4) years (24-86 years old), was allocated into two groups. In the full digital workflow group, intraoral scanning was taken immediately after implant placement, and a full zirconia implant crown was fabricated using model-free computer aided design/computer aided manufacturing (CAD/CAM) procedure (=14). In the conventional group, a conventional impression was taken 3 months after implant placement and the stone model was produced. A full zirconia implant crown was fabricated using conventional model-based procedure (=21). Three years following crown delivery, all the prostheses were evaluated in the aspect of color, surface roughness, contour and marginal integrity using modified US Public Health Service criteria (MUSPHS criteria). The soft and hard tissue around implant was evaluated using modified plaque index, probing depth (PD), number of implants with bleeding on probing, marginal bone loss (MBL). The biological and mechanical complication were also recorded. Statistical analysis was performed using independent samples test, Mann-Whitney test and Fisher's exact test. The total survival rate of prosthesis and implant was 100% (35/35). No significant difference in MUSPHS criteria ratings on color, surface roughness, contour and marginal integrity of these crowns were found between the full digital workflow group and the conventional group (>0.05). Sixteen out of the 35 crowns had a contour score of B due to loss of interproximal contact. Ten out of the 35 crowns had the screw hole sealing resin sinking or falling off, four in the full digital workflow group and six in the conventional group. There was no significant difference in the rate of prostheses mechanical complications between the two groups (=1.000). For all the implants, there was no significant difference in MBL, PD, the modified plaque index, and number of implants with bleeding on probing between the two groups (=119.50,133.00,142.50, =-0.53, >0.05). The clinical performance of implant-supported posterior single monolithic zirconia crowns fabricated by full digital workflow was stable. There was no significant difference in the clinical performance of the single implant crowns between the full digital workflow group and the conventional group.