Tabarak Naghma, Srivastava Gunjan, Padhiary Subrat Kumar, Manisha Jimmy, Choudhury Gopal Krishna
Department of Prosthodontics, Institute of Dental Sciences, Siksha 'O' Anusandhan, Deemed to be University, Bhubaneswar, Odisha, India.
Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Institute of Dental Sciences, Siksha 'O' Anusandhan, Deemed to be University, Bhubaneswar, Odisha, India.
Dent Res J (Isfahan). 2024 Jan 25;21:5. eCollection 2024.
Implant-supported prostheses could serve as a reliable restorative option for partial edentulism. Various restorative materials have been utilized in fabricating these prostheses, impacting both esthetics and peri-implant health. The present systematic review aimed to assess the survival rate and mechanical complications of zirconia ceramic compared to metal-ceramic implant-supported multiunit fixed dental prostheses (FDPs). We conducted searches in online databases such as MEDLINE (PubMed), Scopus, and Cochrane up until December 2022. A risk-of-bias assessment was done for all the included studies. Data extraction was performed based on the following parameters: author, year, study design, number of implants, abutment material, age range, observation period, incidence of mechanical complications, and survival rate. This systematic review included six studies (four randomized controlled trials and two retrospective studies). The meta-analysis significantly favored metal-ceramic restorations regarding mechanical complications with a risk ratio (RR) value of 1.64 and = 0.001. Meta-analysis showed no difference in metal-ceramic FDPs in prostheses survival rate ( = 0.63; RR: 1.27, 95% confidence interval: 0.52-3.37; heterogeneity: = 0.65; 0%). While metal-ceramic multiunit implant-supported prostheses exhibited fewer mechanical complications compared to zirconia-ceramic prostheses, there was no significant difference in terms of prosthesis survival rate between the two. Hence, both treatments appear to be viable options for long-term implant-supported prostheses.
种植体支持的修复体可作为部分牙列缺损的可靠修复选择。在制作这些修复体时使用了各种修复材料，这对美观和种植体周围健康都有影响。本系统评价旨在评估氧化锆陶瓷与金属陶瓷种植体支持的多单位固定义齿（FDPs）相比的生存率和机械并发症。我们在MEDLINE（PubMed）、Scopus和Cochrane等在线数据库中进行了检索，直至2022年12月。对所有纳入研究进行了偏倚风险评估。根据以下参数进行数据提取：作者、年份、研究设计、种植体数量、基台材料、年龄范围、观察期、机械并发症发生率和生存率。本系统评价纳入了六项研究（四项随机对照试验和两项回顾性研究）。荟萃分析在机械并发症方面显著支持金属陶瓷修复体，风险比（RR）值为1.64，P = 0.001。荟萃分析显示金属陶瓷FDPs在修复体生存率方面无差异（P = 0.63；RR：1.27，95%置信区间：0.52 - 3.37；异质性：I² = 0.65；P = 0%）。虽然与氧化锆陶瓷修复体相比，金属陶瓷多单位种植体支持的修复体机械并发症较少，但两者在修复体生存率方面无显著差异。因此，两种治疗方法似乎都是长期种植体支持修复体的可行选择。
