Ten-year survival and complication rates of lithium-disilicate (Empress 2) tooth-supported crowns, implant-supported crowns, and fixed dental prostheses

CAD/CAM‐fabricated ceramic implant‐supported single crowns made from lithium disilicate: Final results of a 5‐year prospective cohort study

“…Despite a lack of available data on the clinical outcome of cemented ISCs made from lithium disilicate ceramics, high survival rates of 100% (1 year, 2.4 years, 5 years) and 93.8% (10 years) were reported in the few available prospective investigations . These results are in accordance with the present findings and encourage the further evaluation of lithium disilicate ceramics for CAD/CAM‐fabrication of ISCs.…”

“…showed a significantly different fracture mode (radial cracks) as when compared to zirconia-based bilayers (cone and radial cracks) resulting in a negligible tendency toward superficial chip-off fractures still offering a sufficient threshold for catastrophic damage (bulk fracture) above 1000 N. 14,15 These findings could be confirmed in clinical trials evaluating tooth supported restorations. 16 Regrettably, clinical data on implant-supported restorations made from lithium disilicate ceramics is still scarce and, except for one recent evaluation, 17 limited to observation periods not exceeding 2.5 years. 2,18,19 Addressing the aforementioned intention of a metal-free treatment, preliminary results of a prospective study evaluating the outcome of CAD/CAM-fabricated monolithic ISCs made from a lithium disilicate ceramic supported by zirconia oral implants showed to be significantly more successful as when compared to clinical findings made with bilayer systems regardless of the layering technique and veneering ceramic.…”

Fracture analysis of monolithic CAD‐CAM crowns

“…Rauch et al investigated the 10‐year performance of chairside monolithic lithium disilicate crowns and recommended these type of crowns be used in the posterior region in the long term . Teichmann et al also investigated lithium disilicate single crowns on teeth and implants and reported that the high potential of lithium disilicate as a reliable material, especially for single‐unit restorations . Rinke et al compared metal ceramic crowns to zirconia crowns in a period of 3 year clinical service and concluded that veneered zirconia molar crowns resulted in a 3‐year survival, success and chipping rate comparable to MCC .…”

“…8 Teichmann et al also investigated lithium disilicate single crowns on teeth and implants and reported that the high potential of lithium disilicate as a reliable material, especially for single-unit restorations. 9 Rinke et al compared metal ceramic crowns to zirconia crowns in a period of 3 year clinical service and concluded that veneered zirconia molar crowns resulted in a 3-year survival, success and chipping rate comparable to MCC. 10 Sailer et al investigated all-ceramic crowns comparing with metal ceramic crowns in a period of at least 3 years.…”

Clinical and Esthetical Evaluation of 79 Lithium Disilicate Multilayered Anterior Veneers with a Medium Follow-Up of 3 Years

“…5 This structure allows to obtain a flexural strength similar to enamel (360-400 MPa) 5 and a biaxial flexural strength three times greater than feldspathic ceramic. 6 Translucency is made possible despite the high concentration of crystals thanks to their low refractive index. 5 The high translucency helps to achieve natural results also in cervical portion of restoration where, conventionally with metal-ceramic restorations, a dark shadow could be visible.…”