At two years, zirconi and metal frameworks performed equally well with no breaks. Alumina had a 26% breakage, which indicates a high risk in posterior multi-unit restorations. Veneer ceramics pressed to zirconia and metal had significantly fewer defects than layered ceramics. At this point, veneer ceramics designed for zirconia need close clinical observation with an eye to improvement in formulation and handling.
You can read the full results of the study HERE.
-Eric P.
Dental Lab Products recently ran an article regarding a two year study of PFM, zirconia, and alumina restorations, to determine how new technologies stacked up against tried and true metal restorations. Partway through the study, press to zirconia restorations were also added into the mix.
--------------------------
TRAC Research Foundation study compares PFM, zirconia, and alumina frameworks to determine if new means better.
Four years ago, Dr. Rella Christensen of the TRAC Research Foundation began planning a research study to compare the clinical performance of PFM, zirconia, and alumina based 3-unit posterior prostheses. The oldest cases are now in their third-year recall, and the two year results are completed. DLP recently talked with Dr. Christensen about those results—what they are and what they mean for your laboratory.
You can read the article in its entirety HERE.
-Eric P.
