Dental materials : official publication of the Academy of Dental Materials · 2026
A critical scoping review of fractographic studies on clinically fractured all-ceramic fixed dental prostheses.
СтатьяОбзорНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Pilecco Rafaela Oliveira, Pereira Gabriel Kalil Rocha, Bacchi Atais, Tribst João Paulo Mendes, Dal Piva Amanda Maria de Oliveira, Kleverlaan Cornelis Johannes, Valandro Luiz Felipe, Cesar Paulo Francisco, Lohbauer Ulrich, Scherrer Susanne S
Аннотация
OBJECTIVES: Fractures in all-ceramic restorations remain a relevant clinical complication despite advances in materials and manufacturing. This study aimed to map and critically appraise the available evidence on fractographic analyses of clinically failed all-ceramic prostheses, focusing on fracture origins and reporting quality.
METHODS: This scoping review followed JBI guidelines and was registered in the Open Science Framework. Two trained independent reviewers searched LILACS, MEDLINE, EMBASE, Web of Science and Scopus databases. Studies published in English reporting fractographic analyses of clinically failed prostheses were included. Data extraction covered fractographic methods, restoration type, ceramic material, fracture type, and origin location.
RESULTS: Fracture origins were strongly influenced by restoration design and support conditions. In tooth-supported bilayered alumina single crowns, fracture occurred predominantly at the cervical margins, followed by veneer chipping. In tooth-supported bilayered zirconia FDPs, fractures originated mainly at the gingival side of connectors, followed by veneer chipping. In implant-supported zirconia veneered single crowns, fracture origins were identified at screw access holes or at internal angles of the abutment. In bilayered zirconia implant-supported FDPs, veneer chipping was the most frequent fracture type. Significant variability was identified in the quality of published fractographic analyses.
SIGNIFICANCE: Despite advances in materials and manufacturing, fractures in all-ceramic restorations remain a clinical challenge, often associated with design or processing factors. The variability in fracture-prone regions highlights the complexity of restoration biomechanics. Improved adherence to fractographic guidelines and closer collaboration with trained fractographers should be included in future studies to enhance the quality and interpretability of fracture analysis.
METHODS: This scoping review followed JBI guidelines and was registered in the Open Science Framework. Two trained independent reviewers searched LILACS, MEDLINE, EMBASE, Web of Science and Scopus databases. Studies published in English reporting fractographic analyses of clinically failed prostheses were included. Data extraction covered fractographic methods, restoration type, ceramic material, fracture type, and origin location.
RESULTS: Fracture origins were strongly influenced by restoration design and support conditions. In tooth-supported bilayered alumina single crowns, fracture occurred predominantly at the cervical margins, followed by veneer chipping. In tooth-supported bilayered zirconia FDPs, fractures originated mainly at the gingival side of connectors, followed by veneer chipping. In implant-supported zirconia veneered single crowns, fracture origins were identified at screw access holes or at internal angles of the abutment. In bilayered zirconia implant-supported FDPs, veneer chipping was the most frequent fracture type. Significant variability was identified in the quality of published fractographic analyses.
SIGNIFICANCE: Despite advances in materials and manufacturing, fractures in all-ceramic restorations remain a clinical challenge, often associated with design or processing factors. The variability in fracture-prone regions highlights the complexity of restoration biomechanics. Improved adherence to fractographic guidelines and closer collaboration with trained fractographers should be included in future studies to enhance the quality and interpretability of fracture analysis.