Validations (regarding Survival rate)

“….Improved clinical performance can be expected to be achieved by using monolithic zirconia restorations. Clinical studies have shown increased values of strength and toughness for monolithic zirconia compared to zirconia frameworks with laminate veneering. It has also been shown to result in high standards of esthetics and a reduced amount of metal used in the oral cavity. Full arch monolithic zirconia restorations have shown similar overall survival when compared with high-noble alloy-based metal ceramic restorations. No bulk fractures or failures in the framework had been reported in the literature with a follow-up of 8 years. The result of the present retrospective case series is in accordance with these trends as no flaws in the monolithic framework occurred during the follow-up examinations….Monolithic zirconia CAD/CAM-milled framework restorations are a treatment option for full arch restorations over implants, showing a 96% success rate in the present study. Some of the benefits are accuracy, reduced veneering porcelain, and minimal occlusal adjustments. The outcome of the present study showed high success in function, aesthetics, phonetics, and high patient satisfaction….Within the limitations of the present study monolithic zirconia CAD/CAM milled prosthetic restorations were a successful treatment option for full arch implant supported restorations.” (Carames et al., Clinical Advantages and Limitations of Monolithic Zirconia Restorations Full Arch Implant Supported Reconstruction: Case Series, Int J. of Dent, 2015)

“….Of the analyzed samples over a 4-year period, at least 288 implants and 49 prostheses had a minimum of 4 years of follow-up. A total of 18 implant failures were noted (13 in maxilla, 5 in mandible), yielding a cumulative survival rate of 97.6% for implants. One fracture of the zirconia prosthesis was recorded, yielding a cumulative survival rate of 99.4% for the prostheses over the 4-year period. Another 3 prostheses required remaking because the supporting implants failed and 1 prosthesis was remade because the lack of passive fit resulted in a cumulative survival rate of 96.8% for the prosthodontic treatment itself. During the 4-year period, one zirconia prosthesis had a technical complication related to the debonding of titanium cylinders, and 2 prostheses had fractured screws, which were resolved successfully. No zirconia prostheses had chipping of the veneered gingival porcelain….Findings from this retrospective clinical study from private practice showed that prosthodontic treatment of edentulous patients with a 1-piece, complete-arch fixed implant-supported zirconia prosthesis with veneered porcelain restricted to the gingival region had high survival rates for implants and prostheses. Minimal technical complications related to this type of treatment for edentulous jaws and no chipping of the veneered gingival porcelain were encountered.” ( Tischler et al., Rehabilitation of edentulous jaws with zirconia complete arch fixed implant supported prostheses: An up to 4 year retrospective clinical study, J Prosthet Dent., Vol. 120, pp204-209, 2018)

Requirements