Current Findings Regarding Zirconia Implants

Abstract

The small number of studies and the limited period of observation permit only a qualified statement on the clinical success of ZI. The results available to date indicate that ZI are inferior to titanium implants (TI) with regard to survival and success rates. Well-conducted long-term studies are urgently needed to permit a meaningful assessment of the survival or success rates of ZI and a statement concerning their application as an alternative to TI.

Influence of surface roughness of dental zirconia implants on their mechanical stability, cell behavior and osseointegration

“…It can be further inferred that no other major differences were detected between Ti-SLA and Y-TZP-SS, which demonstrates the promising potential for surface modified Y-TZP ceramics in dental implantology. However, in vivo studies over a healing period of several years ( > 5 years) are needed to recommend rough zirconia materials over titanium for applications in dental implantology [28][29][30].…”

Success Rate of Two-Piece Zirconia Implants

“…4 Especially, the use of roughened surfaces was described to improve osseointegration significantly. [5][6][7][8][9][10][11][12][13] In several animal studies, good osseointegration of zirconia implants could be demonstrated. 6,7,14 Furthermore, titanium intolerance was recently correlated in patients with implant failures.…”

“…A review of the current literature shows that studies referring to clinical success are still limited 8,9,12,[16][17][18][19][20] because the number of investigated patients is low and/or only systemically healthy patients were included. Most of the clinical investigations only refer to one-piece zirconia implants.…”

Crestal bone loss and periimplant inflammatory parameters around zirconia implants: A systematic review

“…In a recent systematic review, Depprich et al 14 showed that the implant survival rates of ZrO 2 implants ranged between 74% and 98% for up to 56 months of follow-up. However, a possible risk of bias in the studies assessed by Depprich et al 14 cannot be disregarded.…”

“…18,19 However, certain parameters such as plaque index (PLI), bleeding index (BI) bleeding on probing (BOP), periimplant pocket depth (PPD), and clinical attachment loss (CAL) were not addressed in the study. 14 With this background, the purpose of the present study was to systematically review the crestal bone levels and clinical periimplant inflammatory parameters around ZrO 2 dental implants.…”