Inlay-Retained Aesthetic Fixed Prosthesis Using Monolithic Zirconia: A Case Report

Aishwarya Roy; Rashmi Bansal; Abhinay Agarwal; Mrityunjay Kumar

doi:10.21276/ujds.2021.7.3.17

Aishwarya Roy Institute of Dental Sciences
Rashmi Bansal
Abhinay Agarwal
Mrityunjay Kumar

DOI: https://doi.org/10.21276/ujds.2021.7.3.17

Keywords: Indirect restoration , Zirconia , Monolith, Inlay, Direct restoration, Minimal invasive approach.

Abstract

Various indirect restorations to restore a single missing tooth in the posterior region are available in dentistry such as traditional full coverage fixed dental prostheses, implant-supported crowns, and inlay-retained fixed prosthesis. Resin bonded FDPs represent a minimally invasive procedure; preexisting fillings can minimize tooth structure removal and give retention to the IRFP, transforming it into an ultraconservative option. New high strength zirconia ceramics, with their stiffness and high mechanical properties, could be considered a right choice for an Inlay retained aesthetic fixed prosthesis rehabilitation. The case report describes an IRFP treatment using a CAD/CAM monolithic zirconia. Clinical and laboratory steps are illustrated, according to the most recent scientific protocols. Pleasing esthetic and better functional integration of indirect restoration at six months follow-up confirmed the success of this conservative approach.

Author Biographies

Rashmi Bansal

BDS,MDS,PH.D

Professor

Department of Conservative Dentistry & Endodontics

Abhinay Agarwal

BDS,MDS

Professor

Department of Conservative Dentistry & Endodontics

Mrityunjay Kumar

MBBS,MD

Assistant Professor

Department of Anaesthesiology, IQ City Medical College

References

[1] I. Denry and J. R. Kelly, “State of the art of zirconia for dental applications,” Dental Materials, vol. 24, no. 3, pp. 299–307, 2008.
[2] M. Sasse and M. Kern, “CAD/CAM single retainer zirconiaceramic resin-bonded fixed dental prostheses: clinical outcome after 5 years,” International Journal of Computerized Dentistry, vol. 16, no. 2, pp. 109–118, 2013.
[3] D. Augusti, G. Augusti, and D. Re, “Prosthetic restoration in the single-tooth gap: patient preferences and analysis of the WTP index,” Clinical Oral Implants Research, 2013.
[4] C. Monaco, P. Cardelli,M. Bolognesi, R. Scotti, and M. Ozcan,“Inlay-retained zirconia fixed dental prosthesis: clinical andlaboratory procedures,” European Journal of Esthetic Dentistry,vol. 7, no. 1, pp. 48–60, 2012.
[5] S. Wolfart, F. Bohlsen, S. M. Wegner, and M. Kern, “A preliminaryprospective evaluation of all-ceramic crown-retained andinlay-retained fixed partial dentures,” International Journal ofProsthodontics, vol. 18, no. 6, pp. 497–505, 2005.
[6] F. Beuer, H. Aggstaller, D. Edelhoff,W. Gernet, and J. Sorensen,“Marginal and internal fits of fixed dental prostheses zirconiaretainers,” Dental Materials, vol. 25, no. 1, pp. 94–102, 2009.
[7] D. Edelhoff, H. Spiekermann, and M. Yildirim, “Metal-freeinlay-retained fixed partial dentures,” Quintessence International,vol. 32, no. 4, pp. 269–281, 2001.
[8] D. Re,G. Pellegrini, P. Francinetti,D. Augusti, and G. Rasperini,“In vivo early plaque formation on zirconia and feldspathicceramic,” Minerva stomatologica, vol. 60, no. 7-8, pp. 339–348,2011.
[9] Y. Zhang, J. J. Lee, R. Srikanth, and B. R. Lawn, “Edgechipping and flexural resistance of monolithic ceramics,” DentalMaterials, vol. 29, no. 12, pp. 1201–1208, 2013.
[10] S. Rinke and C. Fischer, “Range of indications for translucentzirconia modifications: clinical and technical aspects,”Quintessence International, vol. 44, no. 8, pp. 557–566, 2013.
[11] C. A. Mohsen, “Fracture resistance of three ceramic inlay retained fixed partial denture designs. An in vitro comparative study,” Journal of Prosthodontics, vol. 19, no. 7, pp. 531–535, 2010.