Polymer-infiltrated and lithium disilicate ceramic crowns have similar survival rates and clinical performance in oral rehabilitation
Polymer-infiltrated and lithium disilicate ceramic crowns have similar survival rates and clinical performance in oral rehabilitation suggests a new study published in the Journal Of Prosthetic Surgery.
The success rate of monolithic polymer-infiltrated ceramic posterior crowns after 1 year is unclear.
The purpose of this controlled, randomized, and double-blind clinical trial was to evaluate the performance of posterior complete crowns in polymer-infiltrated and lithium disilicate ceramics and to assess the impact of oral rehabilitation on esthetic satisfaction, quality of life, and periodontal health.
A total of 33 crowns were provided in 18 participants allocated to 2 groups: Control (Lithium disilicate—IPS e.max CAD; Ivoclar AG) and Experimental (Polymer-infiltrated ceramic—Vita Enamic; Vita Zahnfabrik). The crowns were evaluated before treatment (T0) and after 1 (T1), 6 (T2), and 12 (T3) months by using modified United States Public Health Service (USPHS) criteria, visual analog scales (VASs), oral impacts on daily performances (OIDP), and periodontal parameters. Survival analysis was performed by using Kaplan-Meier followed by the log-rank test (α=.05). The OIDP and USPHS data were analyzed descriptively while VASs for esthetic satisfaction and periodontal parameters were statistically evaluated by using the Mann-Whitney Friedman, and Wilcoxon post hoc tests.
Results
For 18 participants with a mean age of 47.2 years, 19 crowns were manufactured in lithium disilicate and 14 in polymer-infiltrated ceramic. The Kaplan-Meier test revealed similar survival rates of 92.5% for polymer-infiltrated ceramic and 94.7% for lithium disilicate (P>.05). The analysis of periodontal parameters revealed a significant increase in the bleeding on probing (BOP) for polymer-infiltrated ceramics (P=.032) but for lithium disilicate, it was not significant (P=.387).
Survival rates between the evaluated materials were not significantly different, with acceptable clinical performance after 1 year of follow-up.
Reference:
Clinical performance of monolithic polymer-infiltrated ceramic and lithium disilicate posterior crowns: A controlled, randomized, and double-blind clinical trial
Dayanne M.D. Moura, Gabriela M. de Araújo, Lidya N.M. de Araújo, Amanda M. de Oliveira Dal Piva, Mutlu Ozcan, Rodrigo O. de Assunção e Souza. Published:September 08, 2023DOI:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.prosdent.2023.07.016
Keywords:
Polymer-infiltrated, lithium, disilicate, ceramic, crowns, similar, survival, rates, clinical, performance, oral rehabilitation, Dayanne M.D. Moura, Gabriela M. de Araújo, Lidya N.M. de Araújo, Amanda M. de Oliveira Dal Piva, Mutlu Ozcan, Rodrigo O. de Assunção e Souza, Journal Of Prosthetic Surgery
Disclaimer: This website is primarily for healthcare professionals. The content here does not replace medical advice and should not be used as medical, diagnostic, endorsement, treatment, or prescription advice. Medical science evolves rapidly, and we strive to keep our information current. If you find any discrepancies, please contact us at corrections@medicaldialogues.in. Read our Correction Policy here. Nothing here should be used as a substitute for medical advice, diagnosis, or treatment. We do not endorse any healthcare advice that contradicts a physician's guidance. Use of this site is subject to our Terms of Use, Privacy Policy, and Advertisement Policy. For more details, read our Full Disclaimer here.
NOTE: Join us in combating medical misinformation. If you encounter a questionable health, medical, or medical education claim, email us at factcheck@medicaldialogues.in for evaluation.