Zirconia abutments: Biological, mechanical, and esthetic considerations – An umbrella review of available systematic reviews and meta‑analyses

Abstract

Zirconia abutments can enhance esthetics by providing a natural appearance due to their
semitranslucency. Evidence for final outcomes of using zirconia abutments compared to other
available materials are diverse. This study aims to review all available evidence from previous reviews
to compare zirconia and titanium abutments regarding biological, mechanical, and esthetics indices
and survival. An electronic search was conducted on six databases (PubMed, Scopus, Embase, Web
of Science, ProQuest, and Cochrane) for systematic reviews/meta‑analyses published until 2023.
The relevant data were extracted and reviewed from the selected studies. Fourteen articles were
included following a systematic application of the inclusion and exclusion criteria. These studies
evaluated various factors, including soft tissue recession, width of keratinized mucosa, papilla index,
plaque accumulation, Copenhagen Index Score, Implant Crown Aesthetic Index, gingival discoloration,
pocket probing depth, marginal bone loss, bleeding on probing, Pink Esthetic Score, White Esthetic
Score, survival rate, and patient’s satisfaction. Zirconia abutments showed better or similar effects
than titanium in biological, esthetic, and mechanical factors and survival.
Key Words: Biological complications, ceramic abutment, dental implant, esthetics, mechanical complications, metal abutment, survival

Highlight

 Peyman Movahedian Attar: Pubmed,Google Scholar