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.

Effects of periodontal tissue in the gingival retraction before the cementation of zirconia ceramic crowns on an-terior teeth

Clinical evaluation of restoring posterior teeth residual roots and crowns with crown lengthening surgery

Peri-implant Marginal Bone Changes with Implant-Supported Metal-Ceramic or Monolithic Zirconia Single Crowns: A Retrospective Clinical Study of 1 to 5 Years.

Effect of Machining Method and Margin Design on the Accuracy and Margin Quality of Monolithic Zirconia Crowns

Changes of nickel and chromium contents in gingival tissue and gingival crevicular fluid after porcelain-fused-to-nichrome crown restoration

Outcome of Teeth Restored with CAD/CAM Zirconium Dioxide Post-Cores: a Retrospective Study with a Follow-Up Period of 3–6 Years

The Influence of Different Materials and Locations of Crown Margin on Periodontal Tissue of Human

Effect of restoration material on marginal bone resorption around modified anatomic zirconia dental implants: A randomised controlled trial

[Effect of zirconia personalized gingival penetration on peri-implant soft and hard tissue of thin gingival biotypes in the anterior region: a retrospective study]

Efficacy evaluation of zirconia crown on primary molars with caries defects

[Preliminary Evaluation of Clinical Effect of Computer Aided Design and Computer Aided Manufacture Zirconia Crown].

The influence of metal ceramic crown restoration on periodontal health of restored tooth

[Effect of gingival biotype on total crown repair and gingival crevicular fluid inflammatory factors]

Gingival health, plaque accumulation, and restoration outcomes in deciduous anterior teeth: evaluating zirconia crowns versus composite resin strip crowns

The clinical effect of different gingival retraction methods in subgingival non-carious cervical lesions

[Short-Term and Long-Term Effects of All-Ceramic Onlay on Restoration of Premolars and Its Influence on Dental Function].

Influence of Temporary Crowns on the Periodontal Conditions

Screw-retained monolithic zirconia vs. cemented porcelain-fused-to-metal implant crowns: a prospective randomized clinical trial in split-mouth design

Peri-implant and esthetic outcomes of cemented and screw-retained crowns using zirconia abutments in single implant-supported restorations-A systematic review and meta-analysis

Clinical and immunological evaluation of peri-implant tissues around ultra-polished and conventionally-polished zirconia abutments. A 1-year follow-up randomized clinical trial

[Clinical outcome of single posterior implant-supported monolithic zirconia crowns fabricated using full digital workflow and conventional workflow: a 3-year follow-up].