Survival and Success Rates of Monolithic Zirconia Restorations Supported by Teeth and Implants in Bruxer versus Non-Bruxer Patients: A Retrospective Study

Hadas Heller, David Sreter, Adi Arieli, Ilan Beitlitum, Raphael Pilo, Shifra Levartovsky

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

Abstract

The aim of this study was to assess retrospectively the survival and success rates of monolithic zirconia restorations supported by teeth and implants in bruxer versus non-bruxer patients. Methods: A total of 15 bruxer and 25 non-bruxer patients attended the recall appointment. The bruxer group (mean age of 61.2 ± 13.3 years and follow-up of 58.7 ± 16.8 months) were treated with 331 monolithic zirconia restorations, while the non-bruxer group, with a comparable mean age and follow-up time, were treated with 306 monolithic zirconia restorations. Clinical data were retrieved from the patients’ files. At the recall appointment, all supporting teeth and implants were examined for biological and technical complications, and the restorations were evaluated using modified California Dental Association (CDA) criteria. Data were statistically analyzed using survival analysis methods. A significance level of p < 0.05 was used. A total of 31 versus 27 biologic and technical complications were recorded in the bruxer and non-bruxer groups, respectively. No significant differences were found between the two groups regarding overall complications and survival rate. Regarding the type of complication, a significantly higher rate of veneered porcelain chipping (p = 0.045) was observed in the bruxer group. With regard to biological complications, the only complications that exhibited a borderline, although not significant, difference were three fractured teeth exclusively in the bruxer group (p = 0.051), which were replaced with implant-supported restorations. Within the limitations of this study, we conclude that there were no significant differences in the overall survival and success rates of the monolithic zirconia restorations in bruxer versus nonbruxer patients, although veneered zirconia restorations and single tooth abutments exhibited a higher rate of complications in the bruxer group.

Original languageEnglish
Article number833
JournalMaterials
Volume15
Issue number3
DOIs
StatePublished - 1 Feb 2022

Keywords

  • Bruxer
  • Dental implant
  • Tooth
  • Veneered and non-veneered
  • Zirconia restoration

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Survival and Success Rates of Monolithic Zirconia Restorations Supported by Teeth and Implants in Bruxer versus Non-Bruxer Patients: A Retrospective Study'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this