Survival and biological and technical complications of veneered zirconia-ceramic versus metal-ceramic restorations: a systematic review and meta-analysis
5 affiliations
- 1Department of Prosthodontics, School of Dentistry, Isfahan University of Medical Sciences, Hezar Jerib street, Isfahan, 8174673461 Iran
- 2Faculty of Dentistry, Isfahan University of Medical Sciences, Isfahan, Iran
- 3Department of Restorative Dentistry, School of Dentistry, Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran
- 4Department of Prosthodontics, School of Dentistry, Kurdistan University of Medical Sciences, Sanandaj, Iran
- 5Department of Prosthodontics, School of Dentistry, Hormozgan University of Medical Sciences, Bandarabbas, Iran
Abstract
Objectives: This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to critically assess and compare the survival rates and the spectrum of biological and technical complications associated with veneered zirconia-ceramic versus metal-ceramic restorations. By synthesizing evidence from randomized clinical trials, the study provides clinicians with robust, evidence-based guidance for material selection in fixed prosthodontics.
Materials and methods: A comprehensive literature search was conducted in PubMed/MEDLINE, Scopus, EMBASE, Web of Science, the Cochrane Library, and ClinicalTrials.gov from inception to April 2025. Eligible RCTs comparing veneered zirconia-ceramic and metal-ceramic restorations were included. Statistical analyses were performed using STATA version 18, and risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias 2 (RoB 2) tool. The certainty of evidence was evaluated using the GRADE approach.
Results: Fourteen randomized clinical trials met the inclusion criteria and were included in the systematic review. Most studies reported survival outcomes and biological or technical complications for both veneered zirconia-ceramic and metal-ceramic restorations, whereas secondary caries data were limited and were synthesized narratively. Quantitative synthesis suggested a marginally higher survival probability for veneered zirconia-ceramic restorations compared with metal-ceramic restorations (RR = 1.03; 95% CI: 1.00–1.09; I² = 73.7%). Veneered zirconia-ceramic restorations were also associated with a lower risk of chipping (RR = 0.59; 95% CI: 0.48–0.72; I² = 58.2%). No statistically significant differences were observed for framework fracture, discoloration, anatomical form, marginal integrity, or occlusal wear.
Conclusion: Low-certainty evidence suggested a marginally higher survival probability and a lower risk of chipping with veneered zirconia-ceramic restorations compared with metal-ceramic restorations. However, substantial heterogeneity across several outcomes, evidence of small-study effects, and imprecision in some estimates limit confidence in the available evidence. Therefore, these findings should be interpreted with caution, and restorative material selection should be individualized according to patient-specific biological, functional, and esthetic considerations.
Supplementary Information: The online version contains supplementary material available at https://doi.org/10.1186/s12903-026-09551-5.
Related
- Site-Specific Survival and Complications of Extra-oral Craniofacial Implants in Irradiated and Non-irradiated Patients: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
- Artificial Intelligence Algorithms for Early Detection and Risk Stratification of Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus, Multimodal Bioinformatic Phenotyping, and Its Complications: A Technical Review of Classical Machine Learning, Deep Learning, and Post-Hoc Feature Attribution
- Irreversible electroporation for liver metastases not amenable to conventional treatments, an experience with technical challenges, clinical outcomes, and complications
- Immediate Dentin Sealing in Indirect Restorations: Biological Rationale, Clinical Protocol, and Contemporary Evidence
- Failure Load and Failure Modes of Indirect Posterior Restorations Combining Occlusal Coverage with Axial Extension: A Systematic Review and Exploratory Meta-Analysis of In Vitro Studies
BibTeX
@article{abbasi2026survival,
title = {{Survival and biological and technical complications of veneered zirconia-ceramic versus metal-ceramic restorations: a systematic review and meta-analysis}},
author = {Benika Abbasi and Mehdi Mohammadzadeh and Asal Rezaeiyazdi and Atiyeh Farahi and Nazieh Abdollah Kookhi and Majedeh Nami and Morteza Sharifi},
journal = {BMC Oral Health},
year = {2026},
month = aug,
doi = {10.1186/s12903-026-09551-5},
url = {https://doi.org/10.1186/s12903-026-09551-5},
note = {CC BY-NC-ND 4.0},
}
RIS
TY - JOUR
TI - Survival and biological and technical complications of veneered zirconia-ceramic versus metal-ceramic restorations: a systematic review and meta-analysis
AU - Benika Abbasi
AU - Mehdi Mohammadzadeh
AU - Asal Rezaeiyazdi
AU - Atiyeh Farahi
AU - Nazieh Abdollah Kookhi
AU - Majedeh Nami
AU - Morteza Sharifi
PY - 2026
DA - 2026/08/08
JO - BMC Oral Health
DO - 10.1186/s12903-026-09551-5
UR - https://doi.org/10.1186/s12903-026-09551-5
AB - Objectives: This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to critically assess and compare the survival rates and the spectrum of biological and technical complications associated with veneered zirconia-ceramic versus metal-ceramic restorations. By synthesizing evidence from randomized clinical trials, the study provides clinicians with robust, evidence-based guidance for material selection in fixed prosthodontics. Materials and methods: A comprehensive literature search was conducted in PubMed/MEDLINE, Scopus, EMBASE, Web of Science, the Cochrane Library, and ClinicalTrials.gov from inception to April 2025. Eligible RCTs comparing veneered zirconia-ceramic and metal-ceramic restorations were included. Statistical analyses were performed using STATA version 18, and risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias 2 (RoB 2) tool. The certainty of evidence was evaluated using the GRADE approach. Results: Fourteen randomized clinical trials met the inclusion criteria and were included in the systematic review. Most studies reported survival outcomes and biological or technical complications for both veneered zirconia-ceramic and metal-ceramic restorations, whereas secondary caries data were limited and were synthesized narratively. Quantitative synthesis suggested a marginally higher survival probability for veneered zirconia-ceramic restorations compared with metal-ceramic restorations (RR = 1.03; 95% CI: 1.00–1.09; I² = 73.7%). Veneered zirconia-ceramic restorations were also associated with a lower risk of chipping (RR = 0.59; 95% CI: 0.48–0.72; I² = 58.2%). No statistically significant differences were observed for framework fracture, discoloration, anatomical form, marginal integrity, or occlusal wear. Conclusion: Low-certainty evidence suggested a marginally higher survival probability and a lower risk of chipping with veneered zirconia-ceramic restorations compared with metal-ceramic restorations. However, substantial heterogeneity across several outcomes, evidence of small-study effects, and imprecision in some estimates limit confidence in the available evidence. Therefore, these findings should be interpreted with caution, and restorative material selection should be individualized according to patient-specific biological, functional, and esthetic considerations. Supplementary Information: The online version contains supplementary material available at https://doi.org/10.1186/s12903-026-09551-5.
SN - 1472-6831
ER -