Randomized clinical trial comparing monolithic and veneered zirconia three-unit posterior fixed partial dentures in a complete digital flow: three-year follow-up.

objectivesTo evaluate and to compare the clinical performance and survival rate of posterior monolithic and veneered zirconia fixed partial dentures (FPDs). MATERIAL AND

methodsSixty 3-unit posterior FPDs were included in the study. The patients were randomly distributed into two groups (n = 30 each) to receive either a monolithic (Zenostar T, Wieland Dental) or veneered zirconia (IPS e.max ZirCAD, Ivoclar Vivadent) FPD. Each patient received only 1 FPD. Tooth preparations were scanned (Trios 3, 3Shape), designed (Dental System 2016, 3 Shape), milled (Zenotec CAM 3.2, Wieland Dental), and cemented with a resin cement. Technical and biological outcomes and periodontal parameters were assessed. Data analysis was made using the Friedman and the Wilcoxon signed-rank tests with the Bonferroni correction and the Mann-Whitney U test.

resultsThe survival rate at 3 years was 100% for veneered and 90% for monolithic zirconia restorations. Three monolithic zirconia FPDs were lost because of biologic complications. The main complication in the veneered zirconia FPDs was the fracture of the veneering ceramic in 4 of the veneered zirconia FPDs. No fracture of the frameworks was observed in any of the groups. All restorations were assessed as satisfactory after 3 years. No differences in periodontal parameters were observed between the groups.

conclusionsThe results of this study suggest that monolithic zirconia and complete digital flow could be a viable alternative to veneered zirconia in the posterior regions. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: The monolithic zirconia restorations with a digital workflow can be a viable alternative in posterior fixed partial dentures, with good periodontal outcomes. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ClinicalTrials.gov (Identifier NCT 04,879,498).