Zirconia fixed prosthetic dentures are extensively used for replacing missing teeth. The primary objective of this systematic review was to gather and present the results of all in vitro studies and clinical trials conducted on zirconia fixed prosthetic dentures. This review concentrated exclusively on bilayered zirconia and monolithic fixed prosthetic dentures. As such this paper can act as a guideline for more comparable future experimental work on zirconia ceramics. Future studies must use a more systematic approach such as the uniform use of abutment material, material for simulating periodontal support, data about fracture strength before and after fatigue, number of cycles, information about position and size of the indenter. The new digital techniques with long-term follow-up are desirable in further clinical studies.
ÖzcanM, JonaschM.Effect of cyclic fatigue tests on aging and their translational implications for survival of all-ceramic tooth – borne single crowns and fixed dental prostheses. J Prosthodont. 2018;27:364–375. doi: 10.1111/jopr.12566
2.
ErogluZ, GurbulakAG.Fatigue behavior of zirconia-ceramic, galvano-ceramic, and porcelain-fused-to-metal fixed partial dentures. J Prosthodont. 2013;22:516–522. doi: 10.1111/jopr.12059
3.
KellyJR, BenettiP.Ceramic materials in dentistry: historical evolution and current practice. Aus Dent J. 2011;56:84–96. doi: 10.1111/j.1834-7819.2010.01299.x
4.
KohorstP, DittmerMP, BorchersL, Influence of cyclic fatigue in water on the load-bearing capacity of dental bridges made of zirconia. Acta Biomater. 2008;4:1440–1447. doi: 10.1016/j.actbio.2008.04.012
5.
OblakC, VerdenikI, SwainM, Survival-rate analysis of surface treated dental zirconia (Y-TZP) ceramics. J Mater Sci Mater Med. 2014;25:2255–2264. doi: 10.1007/s10856-014-5217-1
6.
SundhA, MolinM, SjogrenG.Fracture resistance of yttrium oxide partially stabilized zirconia all-ceramic bridges after veneering and mechanical fatigue testing. Dent Mat. 2005;21:476–482. doi: 10.1016/j.dental.2004.07.013
RosentrittM, BehrM, GebhardR, Influence of stress simulation parameters on the fracture strength of all-ceramic fixed-partial dentures. Dent Mater. 2006;22:176–182. doi: 10.1016/j.dental.2005.04.024
12.
CorayR, ZeltnerM, OzcanM.Fracture strength of implant abutments after fatigue testing: a systematic review and a meta-analysis. J Mech Behav Biomed Mater. 2016;62(62):333–346. doi: 10.1016/j.jmbbm.2016.05.011
13.
KellyR, BenettiP, RungruanganuntP, The slippery slope – critical perspectives on in vitro research methodologies. Dent Mater. 2012;28:41–51. doi: 10.1016/j.dental.2011.09.001
14.
LarssonC, HolmL, LovgrenN, Fracture strength of four-unit Y-TZP FPD cores designed with varying connector diameter. An in-vitro study. J Oral Rehab. 2007;34:702–709. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2842.2007.01770.x
15.
AttW, GrigoriadouM, StrubJR.Zro2 three-unit fixed partial dentures: comparison of failure load before and after exposure to mastication simulator. J Oral Rehabil. 2007;14:283–290.
16.
BeuerF, SteffB, NaumannM, Load-bearing capacity of all-ceramic three-unit fixed partial dentures with different computer-aided design (CAD)computer-aided manufacturing (CAM) fabricated framework materials. Eur J Oral Sci. 2008;116:381–386. doi: 10.1111/j.1600-0722.2008.00551.x
17.
KohorstP, ButzheinenLO, DittmerMP, Influence of preliminary damage on the load-bearing capacity of zirconia fixed dental prostheses. J Prosthodont. 2010;19:606–613. doi: 10.1111/j.1532-849X.2010.00640.x
18.
RosentrittM, KolbeckC, HandelG, Influence of the fabrication process on the in vitro performance of fixed dental prostheses with zirconia substructures. Clin Oral Invest. 2011;15:1007–1012. doi: 10.1007/s00784-010-0469-8
19.
PreisV, BehrM, HahnelS, In vitro failure and fracture resistance of veneered and full-contour zirconia restorations. J Dent. 2012;40:921–928. doi: 10.1016/j.jdent.2012.07.010
20.
MahmoodD, LinderothE, Vult von SteyernP, Fracture strength of all-ceramic (Y-TZP) three- and four-unit fixed dental prostheses with different connector design and production history. Swed Dent J. 2013;37:179–187.
21.
CamposF, SouzaRO, BottinoMA, Fracture strength, failure types and Weibull characteristics of three-unit zirconia fixed dental prostheses after cyclic loading: effects of veneering and air-abrasion protocols. Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent. 2016;36:901–908. doi: 10.11607/prd.2524
22.
Vult von SteyernP.All-ceramic fixed partial dentures. Studies on aluminium oxide- and zirconium dioxide-based ceramic systems. Swed Dent J Suppl. 2005;173:1–69.
23.
RaigrodskiAJ, ChicheGJ, PotiketN, The efficacy of posterior three-unit zirconium-oxide-based ceramic fixed partial dental prostheses: a prospective clinical pilot study. J Prosthet Dent. 2006;96:237–244. doi: 10.1016/j.prosdent.2006.08.010
24.
SailerI, FeherA, FilserF, Five-year clinical results of zirconia frameworks for posterior fixed partial dentures. Int J Prosthodont. 2007;20:383–388.
25.
TinschertJ, SchulzeKA, NattG, Clinical behavior of zirconia-based fixed partial dentures made of DC-Zirkon: 3-year results. Int J Prosthodont. 2008;21:217–222.
26.
MolinMK, KarlssonSL.Five-year clinical prospective evaluation of zirconia-based Denzir 3-unit FPDs. Int J Prosthodont. 2008;21:223–227.
27.
CrispRJ, CowanAJ, LambJ, A clinical evaluation of all-ceramic bridges placed in UK general dental practices: first-year results. Br Dent J. 2008;205:477–482. doi: 10.1038/sj.bdj.2008.937
28.
EdelhoffD, FlorianB, FlorianW, HIP zirconia fixed partial dentures – clinical results after 3 years of clinical service. Quintessence Int. 2008;39:459–471.
RoedigerM, GersdorffN, HuelsA, Prospective evaluation of zirconia posterior fixed partial dentures: four-year clinical results. Int J Prosthodont. 2010;23:141–148.
35.
SaxC, HammerleCH, SailerI.10-year clinical outcomes of fixed dental prostheses with zirconia frameworks. Int J Comput Dent. 2011;14:183–202.
36.
LopsD, MoscaD, CasentiniP, Prognosis of zirconia ceramic fixed partial dentures: a 7-year prospective study. Int J Prosthodont. 2012;25:21–23.
37.
SalidoMP, Martinez-RusF, del RioF, Prospective clinical study of zirconia-based posterior four-unit fixed dental prostheses: four-year follow-up. Int J Prosthodont. 2012;25:403–409.
SorrentinoR, De SimoneG, TeteS, Five-year prospective clinical study of posterior three-unit zirconia-based fixed dental prostheses. Clin Oral Investig. 2012;16:977–985. doi: 10.1007/s00784-011-0575-2
40.
SchmittJ, GoellnerM, LohbauerU, Zirconia posterior fixed partial dentures: 5-year clinical results of a prospective clinical trial. Int J Prosthodont. 2012;25:585–589.
41.
BurkeFJ, CrispRJ, CowanAJ, Five-year clinical evaluation of zirconia-based bridges in patients in UK general dental practices. J Dent. 2013;41:992–999. doi: 10.1016/j.jdent.2013.08.007
42.
RinkeS, GersdorffN, LangeK, Prospective evaluation of zirconia posterior fixed partial dentures: 7-year clinical results. Int J Prosthodont. 2013;26:164–171. doi: 10.11607/ijp.3229
43.
HaffA, LofH, GunneJ, A retrospective evaluation of zirconia-fixed partial dentures in general practices: an up to 13-year study. Dent Mater. 2015;31:162–170. doi: 10.1016/j.dental.2014.11.009
44.
MonacoC, CaldariM, ScottiR.Clinical evaluation of tooth-supported zirconia-based fixed dental prostheses: a retrospective cohort study from the AIOP clinical research group. Int J Prosthodont. 2016;28:236–238. doi: 10.11607/ijp.4023
45.
NaenniN, BindlA, SaxC, A randomized controlled clinical trial of 3-unit posterior zirconia-ceramic fixed dental prostheses (FDP) with layered or pressed veneering ceramics: 3-year results. J Dent. 2015;43:1365–1370. doi: 10.1016/j.jdent.2015.07.013
46.
Sola-RuizMF, Agustin-PanaderoR, Fons-FontA, A prospective evaluation of zirconia anterior partial fixed dental prostheses: clinical results after seven years. J Prosthet Dent. 2015;113:578–584. doi: 10.1016/j.prosdent.2014.12.015
PihlajaJ, NapankangasR, RaustiaA.Outcome of zirconia partial fixed dental prostheses made by predoctoral dental students: A clinical retrospective study after 3 to 7 years of clinical service. J Prosthet Dent. 2016;116:40–46. doi: 10.1016/j.prosdent.2015.10.026
49.
Norstrom SaarvaV, BjerkstigG, OrtorpA, A three-year retrospective study on survival of ceramic-veneered zirconia (Y-TZP) fixed dental prostheses performed in private practices. Int J Dent2017; doi:10.1155/2017/9618306. Epub 2017 Jun 20.
50.
RosentrittM, SiavikisG, BehrM, Approach for valuating the significance of laboratory simulation. J Dent. 2008;36:1048–1053. doi: 10.1016/j.jdent.2008.09.001
51.
KoenigV, WulfmanC, DerbanneM, Aging of monolithic zirconia dental prostheses: protocol for a 5-year prospective clinical study using ex vivo analyses. Con Clin Trials Comm. 2016;4:25–32. doi: 10.1016/j.conctc.2016.06.001
52.
TinschertJ, NattG, MautschW, Fracture resistance of lithium disilicate-, alumina-, and zirconia-based three-unit fixed partial dentures: a laboratory study. Int J Prosthodont. 2001;14:231–238.
53.
RosentrittM, BehrM, ScharnaglP, Influence of resilient support of abutment teeth on fracture resistance of all-ceramic fixed partial dentures: an in vitro study. Int J Prosthodont. 2011;24:465–468.
54.
KomineF, BlatzM, MatsumuraH.Current status of zirconia-based fixed restorations. J Oral Sci. 2010;52:531–539. doi: 10.2334/josnusd.52.531
55.
TakumaY, NomotoS, SatoT, Effect of framework design on fracture resistance in zirconia 4-unit all-ceramic fixed partial dentures. Bull Tokyo Dent Coll. 2013;54:149–156. doi: 10.2209/tdcpublication.54.149
56.
SulaimanT, AbdulmajeedA, DonovanT, Fracture rate of monolithic zirconia restorations up to 5 years: A dental laboratory survey. J Prosthet Dent. 2016;116:436–439. doi: 10.1016/j.prosdent.2016.01.033
57.
NicolaisenMH, BahramiG, SchroppL, Comparison of metal-ceramic and all-ceramic three-unit posterior fixed dental prostheses: a 3-year randomized clinical trial. Int J Prosthodont. 2016;29:259–264. doi: 10.11607/ijp.4504
58.
QuinnGD.Fractography of ceramics and glasses. Washington, DC: National Institute of Standards and Technology; 2016.
