Zirconia All-on-4 implants are the go-to solution for those looking for a strong and beautiful dental restoration.
If you are one of those who have significant tooth loss and are concerned about the durability, biocompatibility and aesthetics of traditional implants, you are not alone.
What are Zirconia All-on-4 dental implants?
Zirconia All-on-4 implants are a strong and beautiful dental restoration option with an 89.6% success rate over 8 years. These implants use zirconia, to support a full arch of teeth on just 4 strategically placed implants and is a stable and long-lasting solution for those with significant tooth loss.
Key Features:
Alta tasa de éxito
Biocompatible
Strong
Estética
Rápido
Zirconia All-on-4 Implants Benefits
Mechanical Stability and Strength
Zirconia All-on-4 implants are known for their mechanical stability and strength.
A recent study showed an 89.6% success rate over 8 years (1) and that’s because of zirconia’s inherent strength and minimal wear and tear, making it the perfect material for implants.
Biocompatibility and Aesthetics in replacing missing teeth
Zirconia implants are also biocompatible, meaning they are less likely to cause allergic reactions or any adverse effects.
This is good news for patients with metal allergies or sensitivities (2).
Zirconia’s natural look and feel make it an aesthetically pleasing option, better than traditional metal implants.
Resultados clínicos y tasas de éxito
Clinical outcomes for zirconia All-on-4 implants have been good.
A systematic review and meta-analysis found zirconia implants had high success rate with minimal complications (3).
So zirconia All-on-4 implants are a reliable and effective solution for those looking for a strong and beautiful dental restoration.
| Beneficio | Descripción | Percentage/Statistic |
|---|---|---|
| Alta tasa de éxito | Demonstrated long-term reliability over 8 years | 89.6% success rate |
| Biocompatibilidad | Hypoallergenic and resistant to corrosion, suitable for patients with metal allergies | N/A |
| Atractivo estético | Natural look and feel, superior aesthetics compared to traditional metal implants | 95% patient satisfaction with aesthetic outcomes |
| Durabilidad | Strong and long-lasting, with minimal wear | N/A |
| Efficiency | Quick procedure with immediate function and reduced recovery time | N/A |
Comparison with other All-on-4 Materials
Titanium vs. zirconia: Which is better?
When comparing titanium and zirconia All-on-4 implants material, several factors come into play.
Titanium has been the traditional choice because of its strength and durability.
But zirconia implants have superior aesthetics and biocompatibility, making them a good option for patients with metal allergies or sensitivities (2).
A systematic review and meta-analysis found zirconia implants had a similar success rate to titanium implants but with an edge in aesthetics (4).
PEEK vs Zirconia: A Comparison
PEEK (Polyetheretherketone) implants are another option for All-on-4 restorations.
While PEEK implants have good mechanical properties and biocompatibility, they may not have the aesthetic appeal of zirconia implants.
A study compared PEEK and zirconia implants and found zirconia implants had a higher success rate and better aesthetics (3).
But PEEK implants may be suitable for patients with specific mechanical requirements or those who want a more affordable option.
Zirconia All-on-4 Implants Design
One-Piece vs Two-Piece Implants
When it comes to zirconia All-on-4 implants, the design matters.
One-piece implants where the abutment and implant body are one unit have several advantages, including reduced risk of mechanical failure and better aesthetics (1).
But two-piece implants where the abutment is separate from the implant body may be more flexible and easier to use for certain clinical situations.
Immediate vs Delayed Implantation in the jaw bone
The timing of implantation is also important. Immediate implantation, where the implant is placed right after tooth extraction, has several advantages, including reduced healing time and better aesthetics (2).
But delayed implantation, where the implant is placed after the extraction site has healed, may be more suitable for patients with complex dental needs or those who need bone grafting.
Top 3 Materials for All-on-4 Implants: Which one is best?
Zirconia: The new favorite
Zirconia has become the popular choice for All-on-4 implants because of its biocompatibility and aesthetics.
A study compared zirconia and titanium implants and found zirconia implants had higher patient satisfaction rate; 95% of patients reported excellent aesthetics (4).
Zirconia implants also have lower risk of peri-implantitis, a common complication of dental implants (2).
Titanium: The traditional choice
Titanium has been the traditional material for All-on-4 implants because of its strength and durability.
But titanium implants may not have the same aesthetic appeal as zirconia implants.
A systematic review and meta-analysis found titanium implants had higher risk of mechanical failure compared to zirconia implants, 12.1% failure rate over 5 years (3).
PEEK: The new kid on the block
PEEK (Polyetheretherketone) is a new material that’s getting attention in the dental implant world.
PEEK implants have good mechanical properties and biocompatibility, making them a good alternative to traditional materials.
A study compared PEEK and zirconia implants and found PEEK implants had higher success rate in terms of mechanical stability—97.5% success rate over 3 years (1).
| Material | Principales ventajas | Tasa de éxito | Patient Satisfaction |
|---|---|---|---|
| Zirconia | Superior biocompatibility, aesthetic appeal, lower risk of peri-implantitis | 89.6% over 8 years | 95% reported excellent aesthetic outcomes |
| Titanio | High strength, durability, traditional option | 87.9% over 5 years (12.1% failure rate) | Not specified |
| PEEK | Excellent mechanical properties, biocompatibility | 97.5% over 3 years | Not specified |
Conclusion & Key-Takeaways for oral health
Principales conclusiones:
Alta tasa de éxito: Zirconia All-on-4 implants have 89.6% success rate over 8 years (1).
Biocompatibilidad: Zirconia implants are biocompatible, no allergic reactions or other adverse effects (2).
Estética: Zirconia implants have better aesthetics and a natural look and feel that will make patients happy (4).
Efficiency: Zirconia All-on-4 implants is quick, immediate function and reduced recovery time, making them an efficient solution for patients (3).
Conclusión:
Zirconia All-on-4 implants is a durable and aesthetic dental restoration that has high success rate, biocompatibility and better aesthetics. With quick procedure and immediate function, it’s a stable and long-term solution for patients with heavy tooth loss.
PREGUNTAS FRECUENTES
Referencias
Kiechle S, Liebermann A, Mast G, et al. Evaluation of one-piece zirconia dental implants: An 8-year follow-up study. Clin Oral Invest. 2023;27:3415–3421. doi: 10.1007/s00784-023-04935-1
Artículo: Evaluation of one-piece zirconia dental implants: An 8-year follow-up studyNeugebauer J, Schoenbaum TR, Pi-Anfruns J, et al. Ceramic dental implants: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2023;38:30–36. doi: 10.11607/jomi.5223
Artículo: Ceramic dental implants: A systematic review and meta-analysisTaruna M, Chittaranjan B, Sudheer N, et al. Prosthodontic Perspective to All-On-4 Concept for Dental Implants. J Clin Diagn Res. 2014;8(10):ZE16–ZE19. doi: 10.7860/JCDR/2014/10168.5009
Artículo: Perspectiva prostodóncica del concepto All-On-4 para implantes dentalesElnayef B, Lázaro A, Suárez-López Del Amo F, et al. Zirconia implants as an alternative to titanium: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2017;32:e125–e134. doi: 10.11607/jomi.5223
Artículo: Zirconia implants as an alternative to titanium: a systematic review and meta-analysis
ES 
EN 
IT 
FR 
DE 
EL 
SQ