Skip to main content
Key Specialties
Cardiology Diabetology Endocrinology Gastroenterology Geriatrics and Gerontology Gynecology and Obstetrics Hematology Infectious Disease Internal Medicine Nephrology Neurology Oncology Pediatrics Respiratory Medicine Rheumatology Surgery
Congress Coverage
2024 ACC Congress 2023 ESMO Congress 2023 EASD Congress 2023 ERS Congress 2023 ESC Congress
Clinical Collections
Advances in Alzheimer’s

At a glance: The ONWARDS insulin icodec trials

A round-up of the ONWARDS phase 3 clinical trials evaluating the novel weekly insulin icodec in people with diabetes.
ADVANCED SEARCH
Log in
Top
BMC Oral Health
Published in: BMC Oral Health 1/2020

Open Access 01-12-2020 | All-Ceramic Restoration | Research article

Wear of feldspathic-ceramic-veneered zirconia posterior FPDs after 10 years

Authors: Ragai-Edward Matta, Constantin Motel, Elena Kirchner, Simon Paul Stelzer, Werner Adler, Manfred Wichmann, Lara Berger

Published in: BMC Oral Health | Issue 1/2020

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

The abrasion behavior of various ceramics is rarely investigated, though it is relevant for the clinical success of such restorations. The aim of this in vivo study was to evaluate the wear of feldspathic-ceramic-veneered zirconium oxide frameworks over a period of at least 10 years.

Methods

The abrasion behavior of 15 bridge constructions from 15 different participants was examined after a period of 3, 5, and 10 years using plaster models, which were then subjected to a scanning process on the Atos II industrial scanner and digitized for three-dimensional evaluation of the abrasion by the corresponding software (ATOS Professional 7.6). The individual post-examination models were compared to the baseline model and deviations calculated in the sense of the largest, punctual loss of material in millimeters (“minimal distance”), the average abrasion in millimeters (“mean distance”), and the volume decrease in cubic millimeters (“integrated distance”). Statistical analyses were performed using the Wilcoxon sign rank test or mixed regression models. Multiple testing was considered by Benjamini-Hochberg correction. The significance level was set at 0.05.

Results

We found steadily increasing wear of the ceramic. The average volume decrease was significant (P < 0.001) at 3 years and 10 years (− 3.25 mm3 and − 8.11 mm3, respectively).

Conclusions

The results of this study indicate that the rate of volume loss in feldspathic-ceramic-veneered zirconia frameworks in the posterior region increases significantly over time. An increasing frequency of parameters was observed, particularly in the second half of the study period. However, the use of this class of materials can be considered clinically acceptable.
Trial registration This study is registered in DRKS - German Clinical Trials Register with the register number DRKS00021743. https://​www.​drks.​de/​drks_​web/​navigate.​do?​navigationId=​trial.​HTML&​TRIAL_​ID=​DRKS00021743
Literature
1.
2.
Dupriez ND, von Koeckritz AK, Kunzelmann KH. A comparative study of sliding wear of nonmetallic dental restorative materials with emphasis on micromechanical wear mechanisms. J Biomed Mater Res B Appl Biomater. 2015;103(4):925–34.PubMedCrossRef
3.
Yip KH, Smales RJ, Kaidonis JA. Differential wear of teeth and restorative materials: clinical implications. Int J Prosthodont. 2004;17(3):350–6.PubMed
4.
DeLong R. Intra-oral restorative materials wear: rethinking the current approaches: how to measure wear. Dent Mater. 2006;22(8):702–11.PubMedCrossRef
5.
6.
Kelly JR, Rose TC. Nonprecious alloys for use in fixed prosthodontics: a literature review. J Prosthet Dent. 1983;49(3):363–70.PubMedCrossRef
7.
Ramp MH, et al. Evaluation of wear: enamel opposing three ceramic materials and a gold alloy. J Prosthet Dent. 1997;77(5):523–30.PubMedCrossRef
8.
Graf K, et al. The influence of dental alloys on three-body wear of human enamel and dentin in an inlay-like situation. Oper Dent. 2002;27(2):167–74.PubMed
9.
Oh WS, Delong R, Anusavice KJ. Factors affecting enamel and ceramic wear: a literature review. J Prosthet Dent. 2002;87(4):451–9.PubMedCrossRef
10.
11.
Spear F, Holloway J. Which all-ceramic system is optimal for anterior esthetics? J Am Dent Assoc. 2008;139(Suppl):19S–24S.PubMedCrossRef
12.
Nayar S, Aruna U, Bhat WM. Enhanced aesthetics with all ceramics restoration. J Pharm Bioallied Sci. 2015;7(Suppl 1):S282–4.PubMedPubMedCentral
13.
Vagkopoulou T, et al. Zirconia in dentistry: part 1. Discovering the nature of an upcoming bioceramic. Eur J Esthet Dent. 2009;4(2):130–51.PubMed
14.
Hisbergues M, Vendeville S, Vendeville P. Zirconia: established facts and perspectives for a biomaterial in dental implantology. J Biomed Mater Res B Appl Biomater. 2009;88(2):519–29.PubMedCrossRef
15.
Pittayachawan P, et al. Flexural strength, fatigue life, and stress-induced phase transformation study of Y-TZP dental ceramic. J Biomed Mater Res B Appl Biomater. 2009;88(2):366–77.PubMedCrossRef
16.
Sturzenegger B, et al. Clinical study of zirconium oxide bridges in the posterior segments fabricated with the DCM system. Schweiz Monatsschr Zahnmed. 2000;110(12):131–9.PubMed
17.
Filser F, et al. Reliability and strength of all-ceramic dental restorations fabricated by direct ceramic machining (DCM). Int J Comput Dent. 2001;4(2):89–106.PubMed
18.
Luthy H, et al. Strength and reliability of four-unit all-ceramic posterior bridges. Dent Mater. 2005;21(10):930–7.PubMedCrossRef
19.
Vult von Steyern P, Carlson P, Nilner K. All-ceramic fixed partial dentures designed according to the DC-Zirkon technique. A 2-year clinical study. J Oral Rehabil. 2005;32(3):180–7.PubMedCrossRef
20.
Sailer I, et al. Prospective clinical study of zirconia posterior fixed partial dentures: 3-year follow-up. Quintessence Int. 2006;37(9):685–93.PubMed
21.
Sailer I, et al. Five-year clinical results of zirconia frameworks for posterior fixed partial dentures. Int J Prosthodont. 2007;20(4):383–8.PubMed
22.
Kontonasaki E, et al. Monolithic zirconia: an update to current knowledge. optical properties, wear, and clinical performance. Dent J (Basel). 2019;7(3):90.CrossRef
23.
Suarez MJ, et al. A randomized clinical trial comparing zirconia and metal-ceramic three-unit posterior fixed partial dentures: a 5-year follow-up. J Prosthodont. 2019;28(7):750–6.PubMedCrossRef
24.
Teichmann M, et al. Ten-year survival and chipping rates and clinical quality grading of zirconia-based fixed dental prostheses. Clin Oral Investig. 2018;22(8):2905–15.PubMedCrossRef
25.
Chaar MS, Passia N, Kern M. Ten-year clinical outcome of three-unit posterior FDPs made from a glass-infiltrated zirconia reinforced alumina ceramic (in-Ceram zirconia). J Dent. 2015;43(5):512–7.PubMedCrossRef
26.
Kern M, Sasse M, Wolfart S. Ten-year outcome of three-unit fixed dental prostheses made from monolithic lithium disilicate ceramic. J Am Dent Assoc. 2012;143(3):234–40.PubMedCrossRef
27.
Holst S, et al. A technique for in vitro fit assessment of multi-unit screw-retained implant restorations: application of a triple-scan protocol. J Dent Biomech. 2012;3:1758736012452181.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
28.
Jeon JH, et al. Three-dimensional evaluation of the repeatability of scanned conventional impressions of prepared teeth generated with white- and blue-light scanners. J Prosthet Dent. 2015;114(4):549–53.PubMedCrossRef
29.
Jeon JH, et al. Three-dimensional evaluation of the repeatability of scans of stone models and impressions using a blue LED scanner. Dent Mater J. 2015;34(5):686–91.PubMedCrossRef
30.
Holst S, Tawdrous R, Karl M. Description of a Novel Technique for Three-Dimensional Fit Assessment of Dental Restorations. In: 6th World Congress of Biomechanics (WCB 2010). Singapore: Springer; 2010.
31.
Jeon JH, et al. Accuracy of 3D white light scanning of abutment teeth impressions: evaluation of trueness and precision. J Adv Prosthodont. 2014;6(6):468–73.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
32.
Holst S, et al. A new triple-scan protocol for 3D fit assessment of dental restorations. Quintessence Int. 2011;42(8):651–7.PubMed
33.
Monasky GE, Taylor DF. Studies on the wear of porcelain, enamel, and gold. J Prosthet Dent. 1971;25(3):299–306.PubMedCrossRef
34.
Rinke S, et al. Prospective evaluation of posterior fixed zirconia dental prostheses: 10-year clinical results. Int J Prosthodont. 2018;31(1):35–42.PubMedCrossRef
35.
Sailer I, et al. 10-year randomized trial (RCT) of zirconia-ceramic and metal-ceramic fixed dental prostheses. J Dent. 2018;76:32–9.PubMedCrossRef
36.
Zurek AD, et al. Wear characteristics and volume loss of CAD/CAM ceramic materials. J Prosthodont. 2019;28(2):e510–8.PubMedCrossRef
37.
Samet N, et al. A clinical evaluation of fixed partial denture impressions. J Prosthet Dent. 2005;94(2):112–7.PubMedCrossRef
38.
Tomita Y, et al. Accuracy of digital models generated by conventional impression/plaster-model methods and intraoral scanning. Dent Mater J. 2018;37(4):628–33.PubMedCrossRef
39.
Nedelcu R, et al. Accuracy and precision of 3 intraoral scanners and accuracy of conventional impressions: a novel in vivo analysis method. J Dent. 2018;69:110–8.PubMedCrossRef
40.
Nedelcu R, et al. Finish line distinctness and accuracy in 7 intraoral scanners versus conventional impression: an in vitro descriptive comparison. BMC Oral Health. 2018;18(1):27.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
41.
Swain MV. Impact of oral fluids on dental ceramics: what is the clinical relevance? Dent Mater. 2014;30(1):33–42.PubMedCrossRef
42.
43.
Milleding P, Haraldsson C, Karlsson S. Ion leaching from dental ceramics during static in vitro corrosion testing. J Biomed Mater Res. 2002;61(4):541–50.PubMedCrossRef
44.
Ghazal M, Kern M. The influence of antagonistic surface roughness on the wear of human enamel and nanofilled composite resin artificial teeth. J Prosthet Dent. 2009;101(5):342–9.PubMedCrossRef
45.
Suputtamongkol K, et al. Clinical performance and wear characteristics of veneered lithia-disilicate-based ceramic crowns. Dent Mater. 2008;24(5):667–73.PubMedCrossRef
46.
Stober T, et al. Occlusal wear of metal-free ceramic-filled polymer crowns after 2 years in service. Int J Prosthodont. 2008;21(2):161–5.PubMed
47.
Howell AH, Brudevold F. Vertical forces used during chewing of food. J Dent Res. 1950;29(2):133–6.PubMedCrossRef
48.
Mundhe K, et al. Clinical study to evaluate the wear of natural enamel antagonist to zirconia and metal ceramic crowns. J Prosthet Dent. 2015;114(3):358–63.PubMedCrossRef
49.
Esquivel-Upshaw JF, et al. Randomized clinical study of wear of enamel antagonists against polished monolithic zirconia crowns. J Dent. 2018;68:19–27.PubMedCrossRef
50.
D'Arcangelo C, et al. Wear properties of dental ceramics and porcelains compared with human enamel. J Prosthet Dent. 2016;115(3):350–5.PubMedCrossRef
51.
Rashid H, et al. Advancements in all-ceramics for dental restorations and their effect on the wear of opposing dentition. Eur J Dent. 2016;10(4):583–8.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
52.
Ioannidis A, Bindl A. Clinical prospective evaluation of zirconia-based three-unit posterior fixed dental prostheses: up-to ten-year results. J Dent. 2016;47:80–5.PubMedCrossRef
53.
Gou M, et al. Antagonist enamel wear of tooth-supported monolithic zirconia posterior crowns in vivo: a systematic review. J Prosthet Dent. 2019;121(4):598–603.PubMedCrossRef
54.
Stober T, et al. Clinical assessment of enamel wear caused by monolithic zirconia crowns. J Oral Rehabil. 2016;43(8):621–9.PubMedCrossRef
55.
Hartkamp O, Lohbauer U, Reich S. Antagonist wear by polished zirconia crowns. Int J Comput Dent. 2017;20(3):263–74.PubMed
56.
57.
Söderholm KJ, et al. Clinical wear performance of eight experimental dental composites over three years determined by two measuring methods. Eur J Oral Sci. 2001;109(4):273–81.PubMedCrossRef
58.
Stawarczyk B, et al. Two-body wear of monolithic, veneered and glazed zirconia and their corresponding enamel antagonists. Acta Odontol Scand. 2013;71(1):102–12.PubMedCrossRef
59.
Heintze SD. How to qualify and validate wear simulation devices and methods. Dent Mater. 2006;22(8):712–34.PubMedCrossRef
60.
Preis V, et al. Wear performance of substructure ceramics and veneering porcelains. Dent Mater. 2011;27(8):796–804.PubMedCrossRef
61.
Ohlmann B, et al. Wear of posterior metal-free polymer crowns after 2 years. J Oral Rehabil. 2008;35(10):782–8.PubMedCrossRef
62.
Seelbach P, Brueckel C, Wöstmann B. Accuracy of digital and conventional impression techniques and workflow. Clin Oral Investig. 2013;17(7):1759–64.PubMedCrossRef
63.
Millstein PL. Determining the accuracy of gypsum casts made from type IV dental stone. J Oral Rehabil. 1992;19(3):239–43.PubMedCrossRef
64.
Thongthammachat S, et al. Dimensional accuracy of dental casts: influence of tray material, impression material, and time. J Prosthodont. 2002;11(2):98–108.PubMedCrossRef
Metadata
Title
Wear of feldspathic-ceramic-veneered zirconia posterior FPDs after 10 years
Authors
Ragai-Edward Matta
Constantin Motel
Elena Kirchner
Simon Paul Stelzer
Werner Adler
Manfred Wichmann
Lara Berger
Publication date
01-12-2020
Publisher
BioMed Central
Published in
BMC Oral Health / Issue 1/2020
Electronic ISSN: 1472-6831
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/s12903-020-01336-8

Other articles of this Issue 1/2020

BMC Oral Health 1/2020 Go to the issue

Research article

Dental implant location via surface scanner: a pilot study

Research article

Evaluation of protective factors in caries free preschool children: a case-control study

Research article

Suitability of MDA, 8-OHdG and wild-type p53 as genotoxic biomarkers in metal (Co, Ni and Cr) exposed dental technicians: a cross-sectional study

Research article

Experiential learning for children’s dental anxiety: a cluster randomized trial

Research article

Influence of the implant-abutment connection on the ratio between height and thickness of tissues at the buccal zenith: a randomized controlled trial on 188 implants placed in 104 patients

Research article

Association of LTF, ENAM, and AMELX polymorphisms with dental caries susceptibility: a meta-analysis