Clinical performance of zirconia crowns Tartaglia GM et al. CLINICS 2011;66(12):2063-2070 Table 4 - Clinical evaluation of the analyzed multiple-unit zirconia prostheses, according to Hickel et al.22 at the 3-year follow-up examination. All values represent the number (and percentage) of prostheses. Clinical evaluation multiple units Aesthetic properties Surface luster Surface staining Color stability and translucency Anatomic form Functional properties Fractures and retention Marginal adaptation Contact point/food impact Radiographic examination Patient’s view Biological properties Postoperative (hyper-) sensitivity* Recurrence of caries, erosion, abfraction Periodontal response Adjacent mucosa Oral and general health Position Anterior Posterior Anterior Posterior Anterior Posterior Anterior Posterior Anterior Posterior Anterior Posterior Anterior Posterior Anterior Posterior Anterior Posterior Anterior Posterior Anterior Posterior Anterior Posterior Anterior Posterior Anterior Posterior Support Implants Teeth Implants Teeth Implants Teeth Implants Teeth Implants Teeth Implants Teeth Implants Teeth Implants Teeth Implants Teeth Implants Teeth Implants Teeth Implants Teeth Implants Teeth Implants Teeth Implants Teeth Implants Teeth Implants Teeth Implants Teeth Implants Teeth Implants Teeth Implants Teeth Implants Teeth Implants Teeth Implants Teeth Implants Teeth Implants Teeth Implants Teeth Implants Teeth 2068 A 0 0 0 0 26 (100) 27 (100) 118 (100) 54 (100) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 26 (100) 27 (100) 111 (94) 41 (76) 26 (100) 27 (100) 118 (100) 54 (100) 26 (100) 27 (100) 118 (100) 54 (100) 26 (100) 27 (100) 118 (100) 54 (100) 10 (38) 9 (33) 0 0 26 (100) 27 (100) 118 (100) 54 (100) 26 (100) 27 (100) 118 (100) 54 (100) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 26 (100) 27 (100) 118 (100) 54 (100) B 26 (100) 27 (100) 118 (100) 54 (100) 0 0 0 0 26 (100) 27 (100) 118 (100) 54 (100) 26 (100) 9 (33) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 16 (62) 18 (67) 118 (100) 54 (100) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 C 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 18 (67) 118 (100) 54 (100) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 26 (100) 27 (100) 118 (100) 54 (100) 26 (100) 27 (100) 118 (100) 54 (100) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 9 (17) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 D 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7 (6) 4 (7) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 E 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Anterior: incisors, canines; Posterior: premolars, molars. A: clinically excellent/very good; B: clinically good; C: clinically sufficient/satisfactory; D: clinically unsatisfactory; E: clinically poor. *All the teeth were endodontically treated. For implants, we evaluated loss of osseointegration. performance in this study than in previous studies with the same follow-up period.16 All of these fractures occurred in prostheses of posterior teeth, which is where most of the multiple-unit crowns were placed, and this is similar to that reported by previous studies that examined prostheses at all locations within the mouth.2,11,12,16 After a one-year follow-up period, Encke et al.15 reported partial fractures in 4% of the single crowns on posterior