Statement of problem
Long-term practice-based clinical evaluations of various contemporary ceramic crown restorations from multiple practitioners are limited.
The aims of this study were to evaluate the clinical performance of ceramic single crowns and to identify factors that influence their clinical performance.
Material and methods
Ceramic single crowns that had been placed at the Mayo Clinic and in function since 2005 were identified and included in the study. The restorations were examined clinically, radiographically, and with photographs. Modified United States Public Health Services criteria were used for the clinical evaluation. The ceramic systems evaluated were bilayer and monolayer.
Fifty-nine patients (41 women, 18 men) with 226 single teeth and implants restored with single ceramic crowns were identified. The mean duration from insertion date to study examination date was 6.1 years. Thirteen restorations (6%) were replaced at a mean 3.3 years after insertion date (range, 0.1-6.1 years). Estimated replacement-free survival rates (95% confidence interval [CI]; number of teeth/implants still at risk) at 5 years after insertion date were 95.1% (95% CI, 92.2-98.1; 153) and at 10 years were 92.8% (95% CI, 89.1-96.8; 8). The most common reason for replacement was fracture to the core of posterior layered ceramic crowns. The most commonly used luting agent was resin-modified ionomer cement. Most restorations exhibited clinically acceptable marginal integrity, shade, no caries recurrence, and no periapical pathology.
The clinical performance of ceramic single crowns at 5 and 10 years supports their application in all areas of the mouth. With the majority of fractures to the core occurring early in the lifetime of layered ceramic posterior crowns, consideration of other monolithic ceramic systems for posterior crowns is advised.
To read this article in full you will need to make a payment
Purchase one-time access:Academic & Personal: 24 hour online accessCorporate R&D Professionals: 24 hour online access
One-time access price info
- For academic or personal research use, select 'Academic and Personal'
- For corporate R&D use, select 'Corporate R&D Professionals'
Subscribe:Subscribe to Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry
Already a print subscriber? Claim online access
Already an online subscriber? Sign in
Register: Create an account
Institutional Access: Sign in to ScienceDirect
- A systematic review of all-ceramic crowns: clinical fracture rates in relation to restored tooth type.Int J Prosthodont. 2012; 25: 441-450
- A systematic review of the survival and complication rates of all-ceramic and metal-ceramic reconstructions after an observation period of at least 3 years. Part I: single crowns.Clin Oral Implants Res. 2007; 18: 73-85
- A systematic review of the 5-year survival and complication rates of implant-supported single crowns.Clin Oral Implants Res. 2008; 19: 119-130
- Degradability of dental ceramics.Adv Dent Res. 1992; 6: 82-89
- Plaque retention on teeth restored with full-ceramic crowns: a comparative study.J Prosthet Dent. 1986; 56: 666-671
- Tissue response to fixed partial denture pontics.J Prosthet Dent. 1968; 20: 143-153
- Survival rate of In-Ceram restorations.Int J Prosthodont. 1993; 6: 259-263
- A report of anterior In-Ceram restorations.Ann Acad Med Singapore. 1995; 24: 33-37
- Clinical experience with Empress crowns.Int J Prosthodont. 1997; 10: 241-247
- Evaluation of fracture resistance in aqueous environment of four restorative systems for posterior applications. Part 1.J Prosthodont. 2013; 22: 256-260
- Influence of occlusal geometry on ceramic crown fracture; role of cusp angle and fissure radius.J Mech Behav Biomed Mater. 2011; 4: 1057-1066
- Effects of geometry on fracture initiation and propagation in all-ceramic crowns.J Biomed Mater Res B Appl Biomater. 2009; 88: 436-446
- Nanoleakage evaluation of resin luting systems to dental enamel and leucite-reinforced ceramic.Microsc Res Tech. 2012; 75: 671-676
- A 5-year retrospective study of survival of zirconia single crowns fitted in a private clinical setting.J Dent. 2012; 40: 527-530
- Incidence of fractures and lifetime predictions of all-ceramic crown systems using censored data.Am J Dent. 2001; 14: 72-80
- The performance of zirconium dioxide crowns: a clinical follow-up.Int J Prosthodont. 2010; 23: 429-431
- Three-year clinical evaluation of two ceramic crown systems: a preliminary study.J Prosthet Dent. 2010; 103: 80-90
- Five-year clinical evaluation of Procera AllCeram crowns.J Prosthet Dent. 1998; 80: 450-456
- Practice-based clinical evaluation of metal-ceramic and zirconia molar crowns: 3-year results.J Oral Rehabil. 2013; 40: 228-237
- A randomized controlled clinical trial of feldspathic versus glass-infiltrated alumina all-ceramic crowns: a 3-year follow-up.Int J Prosthodont. 2011; 24: 77-84
- The effect of all-ceramic and porcelain-fused-to-metal restorations on marginal peri-implant soft tissue color: a randomized controlled clinical trial.Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent. 2008; 28: 357-365
- Influence of abutment material on the gingival color of implant-supported all-ceramic restorations: a prospective multicenter study.Clin Oral Implants Res. 2011; 22: 631-637
- Three years in vivo wear: core-ceramic, veneers, and enamel antagonists.Dent Mater. 2012; 28: 615-621
- Quantitative measurement of tooth and ceramic wear: in vivo study.Int J Prosthodont. 2008; 21: 245-252
- Bond strength between different bonding systems and densely sintered alumina with sandblasted surfaces or as produced.Swed Dent J. 2008; 32: 35-45
Published online: December 12, 2013
This study is supported in part by the American Academy of Fixed Prosthodontics Tylman Research Grant, Academy of Prosthodontics Research Grant.
© 2014 Editorial Council for the Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.