Skip to main content
. 2021 Oct 12;32(Suppl 21):254–288. doi: 10.1111/clr.13863

TABLE 8.

Comparison of annual failure and complication rates for veneered and monolithic‐reinforced glass‐ceramic implant‐supported SCs.

Failures/Complications n studies

Veneered

Estimated annual failure rate* (95% CI)

n studies

Monolithic

Estimated annual failure rate* (95% CI)

p‐value
Overall failure rate 4 0.80* (0.14–4.64) 13 1.02* (0.51–2.05) p = 0.775
Overall failure rate due to ceramic fractures 5 0.62* (0.17–2.26) 12 0.60* (0.19–1.89) p = 0.967
Failures due to core fractures 5 0* (0–4.16) 12 0.25* (0.03–1.81) p < 0.0001
Failures due to catastrophic veneer fractures 5 0.13* (0.01–1.38) 12 0.38* (0.10–1.49) p = 0.402
Failures due to abutment fractures 5 0.50* (0.12–2.02) 12 0* (0–7.52) p < 0.0001
Overall complication rate 3 2.64* (0.94–7.44) 7 1.72* (0.83–3.54) p = 0.459
Ceramic chippings 5 1.00* (0.66–1.51) 11 0.40* (0.10–1.55) p = 0.196
Screw loosening 2 0.46* (0.21–1.01) 9 0.10* (0.01–0.74) p = 0.149
Loss of retention 3 0* (0–3.94) 6 0.25* (0.06–1.07) p < 0.0001
Soft tissue complications 2 1.59* (0.64–3.94) 3 1.10* (0.41–2.92) p = 0.527
Bone loss >2mm 1 0.76* (0.09–2.73) 4 0.53* (0.08–3.31) p = 0.682

C.I. stands for “confidence interval”

*

Based on robust Poisson regression.