Clinical performance of ultratranslucent monolithic zirconia posterior crowns compared with lithium disilicate crowns: A pilot, randomized, double‐blind, controlled clinical trial

Purpose To evaluate, through a pilot, randomized, double‐blind, controlled clinical trial, the clinical performance of ultratranslucent monolithic zirconia (UTZr) compared to lithium disilicate (LD) posterior crowns after 24 months of follow‐up. Materials and Methods Twenty‐four crowns were fabricated and placed in 18 patients, assigned to 2 groups: Control (LD—IPS e.max CAD/Ivoclar) and Experimental (UTZr—Zircon FitPlus/Talmax). Longevity was assessed using the modified United States Public Health Service (USPHS) Ryge criteria, visual analog scales (VAS) for patients’ self‐perceived esthetics, and the Oral Impacts on Daily Performances (OIDP) index for quality‐of‐life evaluation. Evaluations were conducted at baseline (T0) and 1 (T1), 6 (T2), 12 (T3), and 24 (T4) months after cementation. Survival analysis was performed using the Kaplan‐Meier method with log‐rank test (α = .05). OIDP and USPHS data were analyzed descriptively, while VAS esthetic satisfaction was analyzed using Mann‐Whitney, Friedman, and Wilcoxon post‐hoc tests. Results The mean age of participants was 38.5 years. Eleven crowns were fabricated with LD and 13 with UTZr. After 24 months, the cumulative survival rate was 100% for both groups. Both groups showed a significant improvement in esthetic satisfaction over time ( P <.05). No ceramic fractures, occlusal changes, marginal integrity alterations, or secondary caries were observed; however, one UTZr crown presented minor marginal discoloration. Conclusions Both materials, ultratranslucent monolithic zirconia and lithium disilicate, demonstrated high survival rates and satisfactory clinical performance after 24 months.