Long-term Performance of Zirconium vs Titanium Dental Implant

Background: The long-term performance of dental implants is a critical factor in determining the success of restorative dental procedures. Zirconia and titanium are two commonly used materials for dental implants, each offering distinct advantages in terms of biocompatibility and aesthetic appeal. However, comparative studies on their long-term clinical outcomes remain limited. Objective: The objective of this study was to compare the long-term clinical performance of zirconia and titanium dental implants over a 12-month period, with a focus on implant survival rates, marginal bone loss (MBL), peri-implant soft tissue health, and complication incidence. Methods: This prospective comparative study included 100 patients who received either zirconia or titanium dental implants. Radiographic assessments were performed to evaluate marginal bone loss at baseline and at 12 months post-loading. Clinical evaluations included probing depth (PD), bleeding on probing (BOP), and keratinized tissue width (KTW). The incidence of complications such as implant fractures, peri-implantitis, and prosthetic failure was also recorded. Results: Both zirconia and titanium implants demonstrated high survival rates at the 12-month follow-up, with titanium implants showing a slightly higher survival rate (98%) compared to zirconia implants (94%). Marginal bone loss was minimal in both groups, with zirconia implants showing 0.50 ± 0.15 mm and titanium implants showing 0.47 ± 0.13 mm. Peri-implant soft tissue health was comparable, with probing depth values of 2.8 ± 0.5 mm for zirconia and 2.7 ± 0.4 mm for titanium implants. The incidence of complications was low, with zirconia implants experiencing a slightly higher rate of peri-implantitis (4%) compared to titanium implants (2%), while prosthetic failure was more frequent in titanium implants (2%). Conclusion: Both zirconia and titanium dental implants demonstrated favorable long-term clinical performance over a 12-month period. Titanium impl

Authors

Publication Details

Journal
EAS Journal of Dentistry and Oral Medicine
Published
2025-04-18
DOI
https://doi.org/10.36349/easjdom.2025.v07i02.008
Citations
1
Primary Topic
Dental Implant Techniques and Outcomes
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
1.79
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Long-term Performance of Zirconium vs Titanium Dental Implant

Nusrat Kabir
1 citations
EAS Journal of Dentistry and Oral Medicine
Dental Implant Techniques and Outcomes
1.79
article

Long-term Performance of Zirconium vs Titanium Dental Implant

Nusrat Kabir
article en
1 citations

Abstract

Background: The long-term performance of dental implants is a critical factor in determining the success of restorative dental procedures. Zirconia and titanium are two commonly used materials for dental implants, each offering distinct advantages in terms of biocompatibility and aesthetic appeal. However, comparative studies on their long-term clinical outcomes remain limited. Objective: The objective of this study was to compare the long-term clinical performance of zirconia and titanium dental implants over a 12-month period, with a focus on implant survival rates, marginal bone loss (MBL), peri-implant soft tissue health, and complication incidence. Methods: This prospective comparative study included 100 patients who received either zirconia or titanium dental implants. Radiographic assessments were performed to evaluate marginal bone loss at baseline and at 12 months post-loading. Clinical evaluations included probing depth (PD), bleeding on probing (BOP), and keratinized tissue width (KTW). The incidence of complications such as implant fractures, peri-implantitis, and prosthetic failure was also recorded. Results: Both zirconia and titanium implants demonstrated high survival rates at the 12-month follow-up, with titanium implants showing a slightly higher survival rate (98%) compared to zirconia implants (94%). Marginal bone loss was minimal in both groups, with zirconia implants showing 0.50 ± 0.15 mm and titanium implants showing 0.47 ± 0.13 mm. Peri-implant soft tissue health was comparable, with probing depth values of 2.8 ± 0.5 mm for zirconia and 2.7 ± 0.4 mm for titanium implants. The incidence of complications was low, with zirconia implants experiencing a slightly higher rate of peri-implantitis (4%) compared to titanium implants (2%), while prosthetic failure was more frequent in titanium implants (2%). Conclusion: Both zirconia and titanium dental implants demonstrated favorable long-term clinical performance over a 12-month period. Titanium impl

EAS Journal of Dentistry and Oral MedicineVol. 7(02)
Openalex Percentile: Top 18%
Dental Implant Techniques and Outcomes
1.79
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.