SynthesisEuropean archives of paediatric dentistry : official journal of the European Academy of Paediatric Dentistry2026
Prefabricated zirconia crowns versus alternative full-coverage restorations for primary anterior teeth: a systematic review of clinical outcomes.
Synthesis in European archives of paediatric dentistry : official journal of the European Academy of Paediatric Dentistry, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundPrefabricated zirconia crowns have gained popularity as an alternative to traditional options such as composite strip crowns and pre-veneered stainless steel crowns. However, their comparative clinical effectiveness remains uncertain. This systematic review aimed to evaluate the clinical outcomes of prefabricated zirconia crowns (ZCs) for restoring primary anterior teeth compared to alternative full-coverage restorations.
methodsThis systematic review was conducted in alignment with PRISMA guidelines. A comprehensive search of five databases, PubMed, Cochrane Library, Embase, Scopus, and Web of Science, was performed to identify eligible randomised controlled trials (RCTs) addressing the PICO question: "How does the clinical performance of prefabricated ZCs compare to alternative full-coverage restorations in primary anterior teeth?" The Cochrane Risk of Bias 2 (RoB 2) tool was used to assess the methodological quality of the included studies. Due to the heterogeneity of studies, a narrative synthesis of the findings was carried out.
resultsOut of 993 records identified, seven RCTs involving 326 participants were included. ZC exhibited superior retention, with survival rates of 95-100% at 12-18 months, compared with 46-79% for composite strip crowns (CSC) and 100% for pre-veneered stainless steel crowns. Gingival health was significantly better with ZC. Bleeding scores ranged from 0 to 40% in ZC vs. 20-67% in CSC, and plaque-free surfaces were reported in 80-100% of ZC vs. 40-80% of CSC. Aesthetic outcomes favoured ZC, with colour match 98-100% vs. 44-70% for CSC. Parental satisfaction was highest for ZC, whilst secondary caries was absent in all ZC groups. RoB 2 assessment judged six studies as having "some concerns" and one as "high risk."
conclusionCurrent evidence suggests that prefabricated zirconia crowns show promising clinical performance for restoring primary anterior teeth, with advantages in retention, gingival health, and aesthetics. Nonetheless, concerns regarding enamel wear and limited long-term data highlight the need for further high-quality trials.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.