Three-year follow-up of clinical, radiographic, and patient-reported outcomes
By Anina N. Zuercher, Ronald E. Jung, Stefan P. Bienz, Stephanie A. Wenk, Daniel S. Thoma, Marc Balmer
Originally at onlinelibrary.wiley.com
Summary & scoring by The Bell Brief (Dr. Jennifer Bell) using the Drill-Down Protocol (Drill-Down Score) — not the original publisher.
Why it matters for dental
Posterior zirconia implants show equivalent three-year survival and marginal bone loss to titanium implants, giving single-tooth and multi-unit posterior practices a metal-free option that may appeal to titanium-allergic or esthetic-conscious patients without compromising clinical outcomes.
Key points
- Randomized controlled trial in Clinical Oral Implants Research reports three-year clinical, radiographic, and patient-reported outcomes for zirconia versus titanium implants in the posterior region.
- Primary endpoints include implant survival, marginal bone level change, and patient-reported outcome measures.
- Findings support zirconia as a viable alternative in load-bearing posterior sites where titanium has historically been the standard.
- Clinicians placing implants in the molar/premolar region can now cite three-year RCT data when discussing material options with patients.
Who should care
Read the original on Clinical Oral Implants Research
Full reporting and any paywall content live on onlinelibrary.wiley.com. We summarize and score; we do not republish.
Related
- ·Regulatory
Is fluoride still safe for kids? A dentist breaks down what the research actually shows
- ·Research
Inflammasome-related transcriptomic profiles in periodontitis
- ·Research
Clinical efficacy of platelet-rich fibrin therapy during oral surgical interventions
- ·Regulatory
Making Sense of Medicare’s Dental Benefit: Top Five Questions from Learners