This systematic review aims to evaluate the different pretreatments of the zirconia surface and resin cement in order to determine a valid operative protocol for adhesive cementation. Methodologies conducted for this study followed the Prisma (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis) guidelines. An electronic search was performed in four databases. The established focus question was: “What type of surface conditioning method is the one that obtains the best adhesion values to zirconia over time by applying a resin cement?” Forty-five relevant papers were found to qualify for final inclusion. In total, 260 different surface pretreatment methods, mainly combinations of air-abrasion protocols and adhesive promoters, were investigated. Altogether, the use of two artificial aging methods, three types of cement and four testing methods was reported. The results showed that mechanicochemical surface pretreatments offered the best adhesive results. Self-adhesive cement and those containing 10-MDP obtained the best results in adhesion to zirconia. Artificial aging reduced adhesion, so storage in water for 30 days or thermocycling for 5000 cycles is recommended. A standardized adhesive protocol has not been established due to a lack of evidence

The aim of this systematic review was to evaluate the in vitro accuracy of dental implants impressions taken with intraoral scanner compared with impressions taken with conventional techniques. Two independent reviewers conducted a systematic electronic search in the PubMed, Web of Science and Scopus databases. Some of the employed key terms, combined with the help of Boolean operators, were: “dental implants”, “impression accuracy”, “digital impression” and “conventional impression”. Publication dates ranged from the earliest article available until 31 July 2021. A total of 26 articles fulfilled the inclusion criteria: 14 studies simulated complete edentation (CE), nine partial edentation (PE) and only two simulated a single implant (SI); One study simulated both CE and SI. In cases of PE and SI, most of the studies analyzed found greater accuracy with conventional impression (CI), although digital impression (DI) was also considered adequate. For CE the findings were inconclusive as six studies found greater accuracy with DI, five found better accuracy with CI and four found no differences. According to the results of this systematic review, DI is a valid alternative to CI for implants in PE and SI, although CI appear to be more accurate. For CE the findings were inconclusive, so more studies are needed before DI can be recommended for all implant-supported restorations.

The aim of this study was to investigate the load to fracture and fracture pattern of prosthetic frameworks for tooth-supported fixed partial dentures (FPDs) fabricated with different subtractive computer-aided design and computer-aided manufacturing (CAD-CAM) materials. Materials and Methods: Thirty standardized specimens with two abutments were fabricated to receive three-unit posterior FDP frameworks with an intermediate pontic. Specimens were randomly divided into three groups (n = 10 each) according to the material: group 1 (MM)—milled metal; group 2 (L)—zirconia; and group 3 (P)—Polyetheretherketone (PEEK). The specimens were thermo-cycled and subjected to a three-point bending test until fracture using a universal testing machine (cross-head speed: 1 mm/min). Axial compressive loads were applied at the central fossa of the pontics. Data analysis was made using one-way analysis of variance, Tamhane post hoc test, and Weibull statistics (α = 0.05). Results: Significant differences were observed among the groups for the fracture load (p < 0.0001). MM frameworks showed the highest fracture load values. The PEEK group registered higher fracture load values than zirconia samples. The Weibull statistics corroborated these results. The fracture pattern was different among the groups. Conclusions: Milled metal provided the highest fracture load values, followed by PEEK, and zirconia. However, all tested groups demonstrated clinically acceptable fracture load values higher than 1000 N. PEEK might be considered a promising alternative for posterior FPDs.

Clinical studies on the behavior of posterior translucent monolithic zirconia restorations are lacking. We assessed the clinical outcome and survival rate of posterior third-generation monolithic zirconia crowns over a 2-year period. A total of 24 patients, requiring 30 posterior full-contour restorations were selected. All abutments were scanned, and crowns were milled and cemented with a self-adhesive dual cure cement. Crowns were assessed using the California Dental Association’s criteria. Gingival status was assessed by evaluating the gingival index, plaque index, periodontal probing depth of the abutments and control teeth, and the margin index of the abutment teeth. Statistical analyses were performed using the Friedman and the Wilcoxon signed-rank tests. During the 2-year follow-up, no biological or mechanical complications were observed, and the survival and success rate was 100%. All restorations ranked as satisfactory throughout the follow-up period. The gingival index and plaque index were worse at the end of the 2-year follow-up. The margin index was stable during the 2 years of clinical service. No significant differences were recorded in periodontal parameters between crowns and control teeth. Third-generation monolithic zirconia could be a reliable alternative to posterior metal–ceramic and second-generation monolithic zirconia posterior crowns.

The introduction of new ceramic materials for dental restorations is currently a reality; however, little information is available on their surface treatment for the bonding process. Furthermore, surface treatment with plasma on ceramic materials has been recently introduced, although not many studies are available. The aim of this study was to evaluate the surface properties of a leucite-reinforced feldspar ceramic (LIC) and resin matrix ceramic (RMC) after low-pressure plasma treatment. From each material, 48 discs were prepared and subject to surface treatment. The LIC group was treated by hydrofluoric acid (HF) (LIC-HF), plasma with oxygen (LIC-O2), and plasma with argon (LIC-Ar). The RMC group was treated by sandblasting with alumina (RMC-SB), plasma with oxygen (RMC-O2), and plasma with argon (RMC-Ar). The groups whose surfaces were not subjected to treatment were considered as the control group. Surface wettability and roughness was analyzed. The results showed significant differences among the treatments for both ceramics regarding wettability and roughness. Plasma treatments increased the wettability and had a very low effect on the roughness. Plasma treatments achieved similar values for both surface properties in each ceramic group with no differences between both treatments. Plasma treatment seems to be a promising alternative for ceramic surface treatments since it increased the surface energy of the ceramics analyzed and hardly affects the roughness. Further studies are necessary to evaluate the effect of plasma treatment on the bond strength of ceramics.