Comparative Evaluation of Long-Term Clinical Performance and Patient Satisfaction in Zirconia Versus Lithium Disilicate Crowns: A Multi-Center Randomized Controlled Trial

This multi-center randomized controlled trial aimed to compare the long-term clinical performance and patient satisfaction of monolithic zirconia and lithium disilicate crowns in single-tooth restorations. A total of 240 patients requiring single full-coverage crowns were enrolled and randomly assigned to receive either a monolithic zirconia (n=120) or lithium disilicate (n=120) crown. Crowns were fabricated using standardized CAD/CAM workflows and cemented with dual-cure resin cement. Clinical evaluations were performed at baseline, 6 months, 1 year, 3 years, and 5 years using modified USPHS/FDI criteria. Patient satisfaction was assessed using a validated 7-item questionnaire. Survival analysis, chi-square tests, and repeated-measures ANOVA were used for statistical evaluation. After five years, zirconia crowns exhibited a survival rate of 89.2%, while lithium disilicate crowns showed an 84.2% survival rate (p = 0.067). Zirconia showed lower rates of fracture and chipping, particularly in posterior regions. Lithium disilicate achieved significantly higher esthetic satisfaction scores (p = 0.012) but had more mechanical complications. No significant differences were observed in comfort, function, or overall satisfaction between the two groups. Both zirconia and lithium disilicate crowns demonstrated excellent clinical outcomes and high patient satisfaction over five years. Zirconia is more suitable for high-stress posterior applications due to its superior mechanical properties, while lithium disilicate offers superior esthetics and is preferred in anterior regions. These findings support the material-specific selection of all-ceramic crowns based on clinical indication and patient expectations.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Journal of Posthumanism
Published
2024-12-21
DOI
https://doi.org/10.63332/joph.v4i3.3241
Primary Topic
Stroke Rehabilitation and Recovery
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Comparative Evaluation of Long-Term Clinical Performance and Patient Satisfaction in Zirconia Versus Lithium Disilicate Crowns: A Multi-Center Randomized Controlled Trial

Naif M. Alotaibi, Mohammed Alghamdi, Abdulmajeed Mutairan Alanazi, Tariq D. M. Alanazi et al.
Journal of Posthumanism
Stroke Rehabilitation and Recovery
article

Comparative Evaluation of Long-Term Clinical Performance and Patient Satisfaction in Zirconia Versus Lithium Disilicate Crowns: A Multi-Center Randomized Controlled Trial

Naif M. Alotaibi, Mohammed Alghamdi, Abdulmajeed Mutairan Alanazi, Tariq D. M. Alanazi, Ali Alrashidi, Abdulaziz Abdulrahman Almujil, A Alshehri, Abdulaziz Altahtam, Mohammad Abdullah Alrowias, Suliman Abdullah Alnujaidi
article en

Abstract

This multi-center randomized controlled trial aimed to compare the long-term clinical performance and patient satisfaction of monolithic zirconia and lithium disilicate crowns in single-tooth restorations. A total of 240 patients requiring single full-coverage crowns were enrolled and randomly assigned to receive either a monolithic zirconia (n=120) or lithium disilicate (n=120) crown. Crowns were fabricated using standardized CAD/CAM workflows and cemented with dual-cure resin cement. Clinical evaluations were performed at baseline, 6 months, 1 year, 3 years, and 5 years using modified USPHS/FDI criteria. Patient satisfaction was assessed using a validated 7-item questionnaire. Survival analysis, chi-square tests, and repeated-measures ANOVA were used for statistical evaluation. After five years, zirconia crowns exhibited a survival rate of 89.2%, while lithium disilicate crowns showed an 84.2% survival rate (p = 0.067). Zirconia showed lower rates of fracture and chipping, particularly in posterior regions. Lithium disilicate achieved significantly higher esthetic satisfaction scores (p = 0.012) but had more mechanical complications. No significant differences were observed in comfort, function, or overall satisfaction between the two groups. Both zirconia and lithium disilicate crowns demonstrated excellent clinical outcomes and high patient satisfaction over five years. Zirconia is more suitable for high-stress posterior applications due to its superior mechanical properties, while lithium disilicate offers superior esthetics and is preferred in anterior regions. These findings support the material-specific selection of all-ceramic crowns based on clinical indication and patient expectations.

Journal of PosthumanismVol. 4(3)
Ministry of Health (SA)
Openalex Percentile: Top 66%
Stroke Rehabilitation and Recovery
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.