A Comparative Evaluation of Prosthetic and Biological Outcome as Influenced by Two Different Implant Restorative Materials (Porcelain Fused to Metal and Monolith Zirconia): A Prospective, Cross-arch Study.

Objective: To investigate the prosthetic parameters, clinical indices, crestal bone levels, and inflammatory biomarkers in peri-implant crevicular fluid as influenced by two different implant restorative materials i.e., metal ceramic and monolithic zirconia at baseline, 1 Year and 2 Years.

Materials and methods: Twenty patients with bilateral implants placed in the same arch were selected. Monolithic zirconia (4Y-PSZ) crown was placed on one side whereas a metal ceramic (M C) crown was inserted on the contralateral side after randomization. Interproximal marginal bone level (MBL), clinical parameters, MMP-8 levels in PICF, and prosthetic characteristics (as determined by modified USPHS criteria) were evaluated at baseline, 1-year, and 2-year follow-ups. Data were descriptively examined. The results were evaluated using the Chi-Square Test, ANOVA, and student t-test. At p < .05., statistical significance was determined.

Results: Twenty MC crowns and twenty Mono-ZrO2 crowns were delivered. A 100% survival of the implants and the prosthetic crowns was achieved across all patients with no instances of failure noted throughout the two-year follow-up period. The periodontal changes observed in the participants were analysed and demonstrated statistically insignificant alterations. Prosthetic alterations were assessed according to USPHS criteria, revealing minor ceramic chippings and instances of screw loosening within the MC group during both the 1- and 2-year follow-up periods. These incidents were collectively categorized as technical issues. Regarding anatomical form and color match to the surrounding dentition, the Mono- ZrO2 crowns obtained much lower evaluations when compared to the M-C crowns. However, when evaluating the loss of marginal bone and level of inflammatory markers there were no discernible variations between the groups.

Conclusions: The null hypothesis that there is no similarity in the survival rates and interactions at the peri-implant interface between the two types of restorations was rejected. Both monolithic zirconia and metal ceramic crowns demonstrated no statistical differences across all parameters examined in the present prospective investigation.