Abstract：
The primary aim was to investigate survival rate of zirconia versus metal abutments, and the secondary aim was clinical outcomes of all-ceramic versus metal-ceramic crowns on single-tooth implants.
Patients with tooth-agenesis participated to previously published prospective clinical study with 3-year follow-up were recalled after 5 years. Biological variables included survival and success rate of implants, marginal bone level, modified Plaque and Sulcus Bleeding Index and biological complications. Technical variables included restoration survival rate, marginal adaptation and technical complications. The aesthetic outcome of crowns and peri-implant mucosa in addition to patient-reported outcome were recorded. Descriptive analysis, linear mixed model for quantitative data, or generalized linear mixed model for ordinal categorical data were applied; significance was set to 0.05.
Fifty-three patients (mean age: 32.4 years), with 89 implants participated to the 5-years examination. The implants supported 50 zirconia abutments with 50 all-ceramic (AC) crown and 39 metal abutments with 29 metal-ceramic (MC) and 10 AC crowns. The Implant and restoration survival rate was 100% and 96%, respectively. No clinically relevant biological difference between implants supporting metal or zirconia abutments was registered. The technical complications were veneering fracture of AC-crowns (n = 3), crown loosening of MC-crowns (n = 4) and one abutment screw loosening (MC-crown on metal abutment). MC-crowns had significantly better marginal adaptation than AC-crowns (p = .01). AC-crowns had significantly better color and morphology than MC-crowns (p = .01).
Zirconia-based single-tooth restorations are reliable alternative materials to metal-based restorations with favorable biological and aesthetic outcome, and few technical complications.
Patients with tooth-agenesis participated to previously published prospective clinical study with 3-year follow-up were recalled after 5 years. Biological variables included survival and success rate of implants, marginal bone level, modified Plaque and Sulcus Bleeding Index and biological complications. Technical variables included restoration survival rate, marginal adaptation and technical complications. The aesthetic outcome of crowns and peri-implant mucosa in addition to patient-reported outcome were recorded. Descriptive analysis, linear mixed model for quantitative data, or generalized linear mixed model for ordinal categorical data were applied; significance was set to 0.05.
Fifty-three patients (mean age: 32.4 years), with 89 implants participated to the 5-years examination. The implants supported 50 zirconia abutments with 50 all-ceramic (AC) crown and 39 metal abutments with 29 metal-ceramic (MC) and 10 AC crowns. The Implant and restoration survival rate was 100% and 96%, respectively. No clinically relevant biological difference between implants supporting metal or zirconia abutments was registered. The technical complications were veneering fracture of AC-crowns (n = 3), crown loosening of MC-crowns (n = 4) and one abutment screw loosening (MC-crown on metal abutment). MC-crowns had significantly better marginal adaptation than AC-crowns (p = .01). AC-crowns had significantly better color and morphology than MC-crowns (p = .01).
Zirconia-based single-tooth restorations are reliable alternative materials to metal-based restorations with favorable biological and aesthetic outcome, and few technical complications.
摘要：
主要目的是研究氧化锆与金属基台的存活率，次要目标是单齿种植体上全瓷冠与金属陶瓷冠的临床结果。
牙齿发育不全的患者参加了先前发表的前瞻性临床研究，随访3年，5年后被召回。生物学变量包括植入物的存活率和成功率，边缘骨水平，改变斑块和沟出血指数和生物并发症。技术变量包括恢复存活率，边缘适应和技术并发症。除患者报告的结果外，还记录了牙冠和植入物周围粘膜的美学结果。描述性分析,定量数据的线性混合模型，或应用序数分类数据的广义线性混合模型；显著性设置为0.05。
53名患者（平均年龄：32.4岁），有89个植入物参加了5年的检查。植入物支持50个氧化锆基台和50个全陶瓷（AC）冠，39个金属基台和29个金属陶瓷（MC）和10个AC冠。种植修复成活率分别为100%和96%,分别。没有记录到支持金属或氧化锆基台的植入物之间的临床相关生物学差异。技术并发症为AC冠贴面骨折（n=3），MC冠松动（n=4）和一个基台螺钉松动（金属基台上的MC冠）。MC冠的边际适应性明显优于AC冠（p=0.01）。AC冠的颜色和形态明显优于MC冠（p=0.01）。
基于氧化锆的单齿修复是金属基修复的可靠替代材料，具有良好的生物学和美学效果，很少有技术并发症。
牙齿发育不全的患者参加了先前发表的前瞻性临床研究，随访3年，5年后被召回。生物学变量包括植入物的存活率和成功率，边缘骨水平，改变斑块和沟出血指数和生物并发症。技术变量包括恢复存活率，边缘适应和技术并发症。除患者报告的结果外，还记录了牙冠和植入物周围粘膜的美学结果。描述性分析,定量数据的线性混合模型，或应用序数分类数据的广义线性混合模型；显著性设置为0.05。
53名患者（平均年龄：32.4岁），有89个植入物参加了5年的检查。植入物支持50个氧化锆基台和50个全陶瓷（AC）冠，39个金属基台和29个金属陶瓷（MC）和10个AC冠。种植修复成活率分别为100%和96%,分别。没有记录到支持金属或氧化锆基台的植入物之间的临床相关生物学差异。技术并发症为AC冠贴面骨折（n=3），MC冠松动（n=4）和一个基台螺钉松动（金属基台上的MC冠）。MC冠的边际适应性明显优于AC冠（p=0.01）。AC冠的颜色和形态明显优于MC冠（p=0.01）。
基于氧化锆的单齿修复是金属基修复的可靠替代材料，具有良好的生物学和美学效果，很少有技术并发症。
