A Randomised Controlled Trial Comparing a One‐Piece Zirconia Tissue‐Level Implant and Two‐Piece Titanium Bone‐Level Implant for Maxillary Single Tooth Replacement—3 year Results

ABSTRACT Objectives This RCT evaluated and compared the clinical performance of zirconia and titanium dental implants placed in the maxillary premolar region. Outcomes were assessed 3 years after prosthetic loading and included marginal bone level (MBL) changes, clinical parameters, aesthetic outcomes, and patient related outcome measures (PROMs). Materials and Methods Fifty patients were randomly allocated to receive either a zirconia one‐piece (ZrO 2 , n = 25) implant or a titanium bone‐level (Ti, n = 25) implant, restored with a lithium disilicate crown 3 months after implant placement. Primary outcome was change in MBL. Secondary outcomes included implant survival, peri‐implant tissue health, technical complications, aesthetic outcomes, and PROMs. Examinations were performed 3 years after crown placement. Results After 3 years, mean MBL change was −0.02 mm (SD = 0.78) for ZrO 2 and −0.04 mm (SD = 0.36) for Ti; no statistically significant difference was found ( p = 0.635). One ZrO 2 implant failed to osseointegrate. Clinical parameters were favourable for both implant types, although slightly higher bleeding scores were observed for ZrO 2 . Differences in aesthetic outcomes and PROMs were found, favoring the ZrO 2 implant group. None of these differences reached statistical significance. Conclusion and Clinical Implications After 3 years of function, the ZrO 2 and Ti implant as applied in this study showed comparable MBL changes. Survival, clinical and aesthetic parameters, and PROMs were generally favourable and largely comparable for both groups. These short‐term findings indicate that both implant types represent a viable option for clinical use in this application. Trial Registration CCMO registration: NL58957.042.16

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Clinical Oral Implants Research
Published
2026-06-17
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1111/clr.70148
Primary Topic
Dental Implant Techniques and Outcomes
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

A Randomised Controlled Trial Comparing a One‐Piece Zirconia Tissue‐Level Implant and Two‐Piece Titanium Bone‐Level Implant for Maxillary Single Tooth Replacement—3 year Results

Henny J. A. Meijer, Wim Slot, Ulf Schepke, Gerry M. Raghoebar et al.
Clinical Oral Implants Research
Dental Implant Techniques and Outcomes
article

A Randomised Controlled Trial Comparing a One‐Piece Zirconia Tissue‐Level Implant and Two‐Piece Titanium Bone‐Level Implant for Maxillary Single Tooth Replacement—3 year Results

Henny J. A. Meijer, Wim Slot, Ulf Schepke, Gerry M. Raghoebar, M.S. Cune, Jantien H. W. de Beus, L. Muijselaar, C. Jensen‐Louwerse, S. la Bastide‐van Gemert
article en

Abstract

ABSTRACT Objectives This RCT evaluated and compared the clinical performance of zirconia and titanium dental implants placed in the maxillary premolar region. Outcomes were assessed 3 years after prosthetic loading and included marginal bone level (MBL) changes, clinical parameters, aesthetic outcomes, and patient related outcome measures (PROMs). Materials and Methods Fifty patients were randomly allocated to receive either a zirconia one‐piece (ZrO 2 , n = 25) implant or a titanium bone‐level (Ti, n = 25) implant, restored with a lithium disilicate crown 3 months after implant placement. Primary outcome was change in MBL. Secondary outcomes included implant survival, peri‐implant tissue health, technical complications, aesthetic outcomes, and PROMs. Examinations were performed 3 years after crown placement. Results After 3 years, mean MBL change was −0.02 mm (SD = 0.78) for ZrO 2 and −0.04 mm (SD = 0.36) for Ti; no statistically significant difference was found ( p = 0.635). One ZrO 2 implant failed to osseointegrate. Clinical parameters were favourable for both implant types, although slightly higher bleeding scores were observed for ZrO 2 . Differences in aesthetic outcomes and PROMs were found, favoring the ZrO 2 implant group. None of these differences reached statistical significance. Conclusion and Clinical Implications After 3 years of function, the ZrO 2 and Ti implant as applied in this study showed comparable MBL changes. Survival, clinical and aesthetic parameters, and PROMs were generally favourable and largely comparable for both groups. These short‐term findings indicate that both implant types represent a viable option for clinical use in this application. Trial Registration CCMO registration: NL58957.042.16

Clinical Oral Implants Research
University Medical Center Groningen (NL), University of Groningen (NL), St. Antonius Ziekenhuis (NL)
Openalex Percentile: Top 5%
Dental Implant Techniques and Outcomes
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.