International Scientific Journals from Jaypee
Subscriber's Login
Home Instructions Editorial Board Current Issue Pubmed Archives Subscription Contact Us
World Journal of Dentistry


Porcelain fused to metal (PFM) restorations has shown promising results in terms of longevity over decades. However, due to the paradigm shift with the preferences of both the patients and clinicians toward all ceramic restorations, these prostheses are being increasingly used in posterior region. Zirconia is one of the popular materials in dentistry today; it has good mechanical strength and has shown remarkable results in shortterm studies from 3 to 5 years. However, zirconia aging and chipping are most common causes of zirconia failure, besides loss of retention has also been reported in some studies. Nonetheless, there are no substantial studies that decipher the longevity of these restorations over a longer period of time. Moreover, it has been reported that zirconia cannot be used in areas of higher stresses. This review article compares the promising ceramic material zirconia and PFM restorations in terms of longevity and esthetics based on the present studies. An electronic search was conducted across Ovid Medline, complemented by manual search across individual databases, such as Cochrane and Google Scholar for literature analysis on PFM restorations, zirconia crowns, and fixed partial dentures (FPDs). The studies were reviewed and results were compared for the same. This paper summarizes the current scientific and clinical opinion through a brief review regarding the preferred material for posterior crowns and FPDs. It denotes that case selection and certain other factors can play a role in success of the zirconia prosthesis.

Keywords: Ceramic, Fixed-partial dentures, Metal ceramic, Restorations, Survival, Zirconia.

How to cite this article: Vijan KV. An Overview of the Current Survival Status and Clinical Recommendation for Porcelain Fused to Metali vs All-ceramic Zirconia Posterior Fixed Partial Dentures. World J Dent 2017;8(2):145-150.

Source of support: Nil

Conflict of interest: None

© Jaypee Brothers Medical Publishers (P) Ltd.