PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to evaluate the clinical performance and survival rate of implant-supported zirconia-lithium disilicate (Zr-LiSi) bilayered ceramic prostheses over 3 years. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This study included 71 patients, including 34 with implant-supported metal-ceramic prostheses (control group) and 37 with implant-supported Zr-LiSi bilayered ceramic prostheses (test group). The implant survival rate and incidence of prosthetic and biological complications (veneer fractures, dislodgement of screw-access hole filling material, screw loosening, peri-implant mucositis and peri-implantitis, and marginal bone loss) were investigated. The survival rate was analyzed using Kaplan-Meier survival curves, and the identity between two groups was confirmed by the log-rank test. RESULTS: Both groups showed a 100% survival rate, whereas the prosthetic survival rates were 77% and 73% for the metal-ceramic and Zr-LiSi groups, respectively. Biological complications did not appear in the metal-ceramic group, and 16.2% of peri-implant mucositis occurred in the Zr-LiSi group, which was significant (P < .05). Prosthetic complications occurred in 5.8% of the metal-ceramic group with veneer fractures and did not occur in the Zr-LiSi bilayered ceramic group. CONCLUSION This study revealed that posterior Zr-LiSi bilayered ceramic implant prostheses showed high survival rates and similar survival rates to metal-ceramic implant prostheses; however, additional consideration should be given to avoid overcontouring. Zr-LiSi bilayered ceramic implant prostheses may be an option for posterior implant-supported prosthetic treatment.

PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to evaluate the clinical performance and survival rate of implant-supported zirconia-lithium disilicate (Zr-LiSi) bilayered ceramic prostheses over 3 years. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This study included 71 patients, including 34 with implant-supported metal-ceramic prostheses (control group) and 37 with implant-supported Zr-LiSi bilayered ceramic prostheses (test group). The implant survival rate and incidence of prosthetic and biological complications (veneer fractures, dislodgement of screw-access hole filling material, screw loosening, peri-implant mucositis and peri-implantitis, and marginal bone loss) were investigated. The survival rate was analyzed using Kaplan-Meier survival curves, and the identity between two groups was confirmed by the log-rank test. RESULTS: Both groups showed a 100% survival rate, whereas the prosthetic survival rates were 77% and 73% for the metal-ceramic and Zr-LiSi groups, respectively. Biological complications did not appear in the metal-ceramic group, and 16.2% of peri-implant mucositis occurred in the Zr-LiSi group, which was significant (P < .05). Prosthetic complications occurred in 5.8% of the metal-ceramic group with veneer fractures and did not occur in the Zr-LiSi bilayered ceramic group. CONCLUSION This study revealed that posterior Zr-LiSi bilayered ceramic implant prostheses showed high survival rates and similar survival rates to metal-ceramic implant prostheses; however, additional consideration should be given to avoid overcontouring. Zr-LiSi bilayered ceramic implant prostheses may be an option for posterior implant-supported prosthetic treatment.

PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to evaluate the clinical performance and survival rate of implant-supported zirconia-lithium disilicate (Zr-LiSi) bilayered ceramic prostheses over 3 years. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This study included 71 patients, including 34 with implant-supported metal-ceramic prostheses (control group) and 37 with implant-supported Zr-LiSi bilayered ceramic prostheses (test group). The implant survival rate and incidence of prosthetic and biological complications (veneer fractures, dislodgement of screw-access hole filling material, screw loosening, peri-implant mucositis and peri-implantitis, and marginal bone loss) were investigated. The survival rate was analyzed using Kaplan-Meier survival curves, and the identity between two groups was confirmed by the log-rank test. RESULTS: Both groups showed a 100% survival rate, whereas the prosthetic survival rates were 77% and 73% for the metal-ceramic and Zr-LiSi groups, respectively. Biological complications did not appear in the metal-ceramic group, and 16.2% of peri-implant mucositis occurred in the Zr-LiSi group, which was significant (P < .05). Prosthetic complications occurred in 5.8% of the metal-ceramic group with veneer fractures and did not occur in the Zr-LiSi bilayered ceramic group. CONCLUSION This study revealed that posterior Zr-LiSi bilayered ceramic implant prostheses showed high survival rates and similar survival rates to metal-ceramic implant prostheses; however, additional consideration should be given to avoid overcontouring. Zr-LiSi bilayered ceramic implant prostheses may be an option for posterior implant-supported prosthetic treatment.

Purpose: The opacity of zirconia sometimes requires a veneering material; thus lithium disilicate, a veneer material with excellent strength, can be used. This study investigated the fracture resistance of zirconia–lithium disilicate (Zr-LS2) bi-layered crowns according to the design of the substructure. Materials and Methods: Five groups of posterior Zr-LS2 restorations (Zirtooth and Amber LiSi-POZ) were fabricated with different zirconia substructure coverage (control group, groups half occlusal zirconia coverage; 1/2OZ, and three-quarter occlusal zirconia coverage; 3/4OZ) and margin designs (control group, groups collar margin; C-M, and collarless margin; Cl-M). All restorations were cemented with self-adhesive resin cement followed by 24-h water storage and thermocycling (10,000 cycles, 5°C and 55°C). The fracture load was measured, and failure mode analysis, fractography, and elemental analysis were performed. The one-way analysis of variance and Fisher’s exact test were performed for statistical analyses (α=.05). Results: A significant difference was found in the fracture load of Zr-LS2 restorations according to the zirconia coverage of the occlusal area and margin design (P<.05). Group 3/4OZ was significantly larger than the control group C and 1/2OZ (P<.05). The C-M group had greater fracture loads based on margin design than the control group C and Cl-M (P<.05). Conclusion The fracture resistance of posterior Zr-LS2 restorations increased with the zirconia coverage, occlusal thickness, and collar margin.

Purpose: The opacity of zirconia sometimes requires a veneering material; thus lithium disilicate, a veneer material with excellent strength, can be used. This study investigated the fracture resistance of zirconia–lithium disilicate (Zr-LS2) bi-layered crowns according to the design of the substructure. Materials and Methods: Five groups of posterior Zr-LS2 restorations (Zirtooth and Amber LiSi-POZ) were fabricated with different zirconia substructure coverage (control group, groups half occlusal zirconia coverage; 1/2OZ, and three-quarter occlusal zirconia coverage; 3/4OZ) and margin designs (control group, groups collar margin; C-M, and collarless margin; Cl-M). All restorations were cemented with self-adhesive resin cement followed by 24-h water storage and thermocycling (10,000 cycles, 5°C and 55°C). The fracture load was measured, and failure mode analysis, fractography, and elemental analysis were performed. The one-way analysis of variance and Fisher’s exact test were performed for statistical analyses (α=.05). Results: A significant difference was found in the fracture load of Zr-LS2 restorations according to the zirconia coverage of the occlusal area and margin design (P<.05). Group 3/4OZ was significantly larger than the control group C and 1/2OZ (P<.05). The C-M group had greater fracture loads based on margin design than the control group C and Cl-M (P<.05). Conclusion The fracture resistance of posterior Zr-LS2 restorations increased with the zirconia coverage, occlusal thickness, and collar margin.

Purpose: The opacity of zirconia sometimes requires a veneering material; thus lithium disilicate, a veneer material with excellent strength, can be used. This study investigated the fracture resistance of zirconia–lithium disilicate (Zr-LS2) bi-layered crowns according to the design of the substructure. Materials and Methods: Five groups of posterior Zr-LS2 restorations (Zirtooth and Amber LiSi-POZ) were fabricated with different zirconia substructure coverage (control group, groups half occlusal zirconia coverage; 1/2OZ, and three-quarter occlusal zirconia coverage; 3/4OZ) and margin designs (control group, groups collar margin; C-M, and collarless margin; Cl-M). All restorations were cemented with self-adhesive resin cement followed by 24-h water storage and thermocycling (10,000 cycles, 5°C and 55°C). The fracture load was measured, and failure mode analysis, fractography, and elemental analysis were performed. The one-way analysis of variance and Fisher’s exact test were performed for statistical analyses (α=.05). Results: A significant difference was found in the fracture load of Zr-LS2 restorations according to the zirconia coverage of the occlusal area and margin design (P<.05). Group 3/4OZ was significantly larger than the control group C and 1/2OZ (P<.05). The C-M group had greater fracture loads based on margin design than the control group C and Cl-M (P<.05). Conclusion The fracture resistance of posterior Zr-LS2 restorations increased with the zirconia coverage, occlusal thickness, and collar margin.

PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to evaluate the clinical performance and survival rate of implant-supported zirconia-lithium disilicate (Zr-LiSi) bilayered ceramic prostheses over 3 years. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This study included 71 patients, including 34 with implant-supported metal-ceramic prostheses (control group) and 37 with implant-supported Zr-LiSi bilayered ceramic prostheses (test group). The implant survival rate and incidence of prosthetic and biological complications (veneer fractures, dislodgement of screw-access hole filling material, screw loosening, peri-implant mucositis and peri-implantitis, and marginal bone loss) were investigated. The survival rate was analyzed using Kaplan-Meier survival curves, and the identity between two groups was confirmed by the log-rank test. RESULTS: Both groups showed a 100% survival rate, whereas the prosthetic survival rates were 77% and 73% for the metal-ceramic and Zr-LiSi groups, respectively. Biological complications did not appear in the metal-ceramic group, and 16.2% of peri-implant mucositis occurred in the Zr-LiSi group, which was significant (P < .05). Prosthetic complications occurred in 5.8% of the metal-ceramic group with veneer fractures and did not occur in the Zr-LiSi bilayered ceramic group. CONCLUSION This study revealed that posterior Zr-LiSi bilayered ceramic implant prostheses showed high survival rates and similar survival rates to metal-ceramic implant prostheses; however, additional consideration should be given to avoid overcontouring. Zr-LiSi bilayered ceramic implant prostheses may be an option for posterior implant-supported prosthetic treatment.