IADR Abstract Archives
Effect of Type of Ceramic on Longevity of Esthetic Restorations: Cross Sectional Study
Objectives: To highlight the importance of choosing the right type of ceramic in the anterior and posterior sectors and their influence on the longevity on minimally invasive restorations
Methods: A cross-sectional study of 76 patients treated in the department of fixed prosthodontics and at private dental offices, through a clinical survey, the longevity and the type of ceramic used for esthetic restorations was determined
This study was compared with other studies
Results: A total of 76 cases of different minimally invasive ceramic restorations:
The majority of restorations was fabricated with vitro ceramic (55) had a success rate 61.8% yet a survival rate 89.1%
For zirconia ceramic 7 different type of minimally invasive restorations had a 57.1% survival rate with 28.6% partial failure rate
For the last 14 restorations that was fabricated with hybrid ceramic, the study showed a 60.0% of success rate and 13.3% of total failure rate
The study of the effect of ceramic type on the prognosis of minimally invasive restorations was not statistically significant (p>0.05).
Conclusions: Praticiens need to consider various factors when choosing restorative materials, with the longevity of
restorations being one of the most important criteria.
Different material options, manufacturing techniques and protocols are available. It is important to map the literature to know the state of the art about of clinical failures related to these minimally invasive prostheses with difeerent type of ceramic.
Methods: A cross-sectional study of 76 patients treated in the department of fixed prosthodontics and at private dental offices, through a clinical survey, the longevity and the type of ceramic used for esthetic restorations was determined
This study was compared with other studies
Results: A total of 76 cases of different minimally invasive ceramic restorations:
The majority of restorations was fabricated with vitro ceramic (55) had a success rate 61.8% yet a survival rate 89.1%
For zirconia ceramic 7 different type of minimally invasive restorations had a 57.1% survival rate with 28.6% partial failure rate
For the last 14 restorations that was fabricated with hybrid ceramic, the study showed a 60.0% of success rate and 13.3% of total failure rate
The study of the effect of ceramic type on the prognosis of minimally invasive restorations was not statistically significant (p>0.05).
Conclusions: Praticiens need to consider various factors when choosing restorative materials, with the longevity of
restorations being one of the most important criteria.
Different material options, manufacturing techniques and protocols are available. It is important to map the literature to know the state of the art about of clinical failures related to these minimally invasive prostheses with difeerent type of ceramic.