EVALUATION OF MARGINAL ADAPTATION IN METAL-CERAMIC VERSUS ALL-CERAMIC FIXED PARTIAL DENTURES USING CLINICAL METHODS
Main Article Content
Keywords
Marginal adaptation; Fixed partial denture; Metal-ceramic restoration; All-ceramic restoration; Zirconia FPD
Abstract
Background: Marginal adaptation is a critical determinant of the biological and mechanical success of fixed partial dentures (FPDs). While metal-ceramic FPDs have long been considered the clinical standard, advances in zirconia-based all-ceramic systems necessitate comparative clinical evaluation of marginal integrity using in vivo methods.
Aim: To clinically compare marginal adaptation of metal-ceramic and zirconia-based all-ceramic three-unit fixed partial dentures using standardized clinical assessment methods over a 12-month period.
Materials and Methods: This prospective comparative study included 60 patients requiring posterior three-unit FPDs, divided equally into metal-ceramic (Group MC) and all-ceramic zirconia-based (Group AC) groups. Standardized tooth preparation, impression, fabrication, and cementation protocols were followed. Marginal adaptation was evaluated at baseline, 6 months, and 12 months using modified United States Public Health Service (USPHS) criteria and the silicone replica technique for marginal gap measurement. Statistical analysis was performed with significance set at p<0.05.
Results: Both groups demonstrated clinically acceptable marginal adaptation throughout follow-up. USPHS scores showed no statistically significant intergroup differences at any interval. Mean marginal gap values increased over time in both groups; however, at 12 months, the all-ceramic group exhibited significantly lower marginal gaps compared to the metal-ceramic group (p=0.02). Clinical events such as sensitivity and gingival bleeding were infrequent and comparable.
Conclusion: Zirconia-based all-ceramic FPDs demonstrated marginal adaptation comparable to metal-ceramic FPDs, with superior quantitative marginal gap values at 12 months, supporting their clinical reliability in posterior applications.
References
2. Sorensen JA, Martinoff JT. Clinical significance of marginal fit. J Prosthet Dent. 1985;54(5):695–700.
3. Boening KW, Wolf BH, Schmidt AE, Kästner K, Walter MH. Clinical fit of Procera AllCeram crowns. J Prosthet Dent. 2000;84(4):419–424.
4. Ryge G. Clinical criteria. Int Dent J. 1980;30(4):347–358.
5. United States Public Health Service. USPHS guidelines for clinical evaluation of dental restorations. Public Health Rep. 1971;86:25–32.
6. Beuer F, Aggstaller H, Edelhoff D, Gernet W, Sorensen J. Marginal and internal fits of fixed dental prostheses zirconia retainers. Dent Mater. 2009;25(1):94–102.
7. Sailer I, Fehér A, Filser F, Gauckler LJ, Lüthy H, Hämmerle CH. Five-year clinical results of zirconia frameworks for posterior fixed partial dentures. Int J Prosthodont. 2007;20(4):383–388.
8. Reich S, Wichmann M, Nkenke E, Proeschel P. Clinical fit of all-ceramic three-unit fixed partial dentures. J Prosthet Dent. 2005;94(4):337–344.
9. Gonzalo E, Suárez MJ, Serrano B, Lozano JFL. A comparison of the marginal vertical discrepancies of zirconium and metal ceramic posterior fixed dental prostheses. J Prosthet Dent. 2009;102(6):369–379.
10. Abduo J, Lyons K. Fit of zirconia fixed partial denture: A systematic review. J Oral Rehabil. 2015;42(2):122–137.
11. McLean JW, von Fraunhofer JA. The estimation of cement film thickness by an in vivo technique. Br Dent J. 1971;131(3):107–111.
12. Karlsson S. A clinical evaluation of fixed bridges, 10 years following insertion. J Oral Rehabil. 1986;13(5):423–432.
13. Vigolo P, Fonzi F. An in vitro evaluation of fit of zirconium-oxide-based ceramic single crowns. J Prosthet Dent. 2008;100(2):88–94.
14. Tinschert J, Natt G, Mautsch W, Augthun M, Spiekermann H. Fracture resistance of lithium disilicate-, alumina-, and zirconia-based three-unit fixed partial dentures. J Dent. 2001;29(8):589–598.
15. Coli P, Karlsson S. Fit of a new pressure-sintered zirconium dioxide coping. Int J Prosthodont. 2004;17(1):59–64.
16. Jacobs MS, Windeler AS. An investigation of dental luting cement solubility as a function of the marginal gap. J Prosthet Dent. 1991;65(3):436–442.
17. Frankenberger R, Krämer N, Petschelt A. Long-term effect of dentin primers on dentin bond strength. Am J Dent. 2000;13(2):79–84.
18. Bindl A, Mörmann WH. Clinical evaluation of adhesively placed Cerec endo-crowns after 2 years. J Adhes Dent. 1999;1(3):255–265.
19. Piwowarczyk A, Lauer HC. Mechanical properties of luting cements after water storage. Oper Dent. 2003;28(5):535–542.
20. Christensen GJ. Marginal fit of gold inlays and onlays. J Prosthet Dent. 1966;16(2):297–305.
21. Manek P, Joshi R, Singh S. Effect of Silver Diamine Fluoride on Surface Microhardness of Enamel. Journal of Pharmacy and Bioallied Sciences. 2020;12(Suppl 1):S123–S128. doi: 10.4103/jpbs.JPBS_197_20.
22. Manek P, Kumar R, Desai S. Alterations in Oropharyngeal Airway Volume Following Mandibular Anterior Repositioning. Journal of Cardiovascular Disease Research. 2021;12(3):234–240. doi: 10.31838/jcdr.2021.12.03.32.
23. Manek P, Sharma N, Patel K. ADR Assessment and Prevention in Tertiary Hospital of India. AIJRRLSJM. 2021;4(1):89–95. doi: 10.22259/2639-6736.0401003.
24. Syed AK, Godavarthy DS, Kumar KK, Poosarla CS, Reddy GS, Reddy BV. Estimation of salivary superoxide dismutase, glutathione peroxidase, catalase individuals with and without tobacco habits. J NTR Univ Health Sci 2021;10:27-32.
25. Suneetha M, Ramya A, Afroz Kalmee S. A fundamental change in approach in the dental and oral hygiene management in children during Covid 19 pandemic. IOSR JDMS (IOSR-JDMS). 2020;19(12):16-20.
26. Devi Priya B., Afroz Kalmee S., Omkar Danda E. B. ., & Dasarathi A. Root end filling material which is better in marginal adaptation? An invitro study. International Journal of Medical and Biomedical Studies.2021;5(1):112-128. https://doi.org/10.32553/ijmbs.v5i1.1635

