International Journal of Clinical Pediatric Dentistry

Register      Login

VOLUME 15 , ISSUE 1 ( January-February, 2022 ) > List of Articles

RESEARCH ARTICLE

Clinical Evaluation of Stainless Steel Crown versus Zirconia Crown in Primary Molars: An In Vivo Study

Rupal Agrawal, Ritu Khanduja, Methili Singhal, Sonal Gupta, Manisha Kaushik

Keywords : Randomized controlled trial, Wilcoxon signed ranks test, Zirconia crown

Citation Information : Agrawal R, Khanduja R, Singhal M, Gupta S, Kaushik M. Clinical Evaluation of Stainless Steel Crown versus Zirconia Crown in Primary Molars: An In Vivo Study. Int J Clin Pediatr Dent 2022; 15 (1):15-19.

DOI: 10.5005/jp-journals-10005-2134

License: CC BY-NC 4.0

Published Online: 13-04-2022

Copyright Statement:  Copyright © 2022; The Author(s).


Abstract

Aim: The objective of this clinical trial was to evaluate and compare two full-coronal restoration [stainless steel crowns (SSCs) and zirconia crown] in carious primary posterior teeth. Materials and methods: Forty endodontically treated primary teeth in children within the age-group of 3–9 years were selected and divided into two equal groups (20 SSCs and 20 zirconia crown). The two crowns were evaluated for retentivity of crown, temporomandibular joint (TMJ) problem, gingival response, plaque accumulation, and tooth wear in opposing teeth after 1st and 3rd month follow-up. Results: Both the crowns showed 100% results regarding TMJ problems, but SSCs performed better in terms of retention of crown, gingival response, plaque accumulation, and tooth wear in opposing teeth. The statistics showed significant result by using Mann–Whitney U test and Wilcoxon signed-rank test. Conclusion: Stainless steel crowns performed better among both the full-coronal restoration for posterior primary teeth. Clinical significance: Stainless steel crowns remain “Gold Standard”, for posterior full coverage restorations in primary molars as compared to zirconia crowns.


HTML PDF Share
  1. Prabhakar AR, Chakraborty A, Nadig B, et al. Finite element stress analysis of restored primary teeth: A comparative evaluation between stainless steel crowns and preformed zirconia crowns. Int J Oral Health Sci 2017;7:10–15. DOI: 10.4103/ijohs.ijohs_18_17
  2. Kilpatrick N, Seow K, Cameron A, et al. Pulp therapy for primary and young permanent teeth. Handbook of Pediatric Dentistry 2003;2:71–86.
  3. Choi J-W, Bae I-H, Noh T-H, et al. Wear of primary teeth caused by opposed all-ceramic or stainless steel crowns. J Adv Prosthodont 2016;8:43–52. DOI: 10.4047/jap.2016.8.1.43
  4. Khatri A. Esthetic zirconia crown in pedodontics. Int J Pedod Rehabil 2017;2:31–33. DOI: 10.4103/ijpr.ijpr_24_16
  5. Ryge G. Clinical criteria. Int Dent J. 1980;30:34–58. PMID: 6935165.
  6. Smith BG, Knight JK. An index for measuring the wear of teeth. Br Dent J 1984;156:435–438. DOI: 10.1038/sj.bdj.4805394
  7. Abdulhadi BS, Abdullah MM, Alaki SM, et al. Clinical evaluation between zirconia crowns and stainless steel crowns in primary molars teeth. J Pediatr Dent 2017;5:21–27. DOI: 10.4103/jpd.jpd_21_17
  8. Behr M, Proff P, Rosentritt M. Monolithic zirconia: a source of temporomandibular disorders in the future. Dtsch Zahnarztl Z Int J 2019;1:57–59. DOI: 10.3238/dzz-int.2019.0057-0059
  9. Tallents RH, Catania J, Sommers E. Temporomandibular joint findings in pediatric population and young adult: a critical review. Angle Orthod 1990;61(1):7–16. DOI: 10.1043/0003-3219(1991)061<0007:TJFIPP>2.0.CO;2
  10. Sailer I, Feher A, Filser F, et al. Five-year clinical results of zirconia frameworks for posterior fixed partial dentures. Int J Prosthodont. 2007;20(4):383–388. PMID: 17695869.
  11. Henderson HZ. Evaluation of the preformed stainless steel crown. ASDC J Dent Child. 1973;40(5):353–358. PMID: 4582956.
  12. Walia T, Salami AA, Bashir R, et al. A randomized controlled trial of three aesthetic full-coronal restorations in primary maxillary teeth. Eur J Pediatr Dent 2014;15(2):113–118. PMID: 25102458.
  13. Aly GMM, Ahmed DM, Saad NM. Quantitative and qualitative assessment of wear of primary enamel against three types of full coronal coverage. J Oral Health Dent Manag 2016;15(2):80–86. DOI: 10.4172/2247-2452.1000876
PDF Share
PDF Share

© Jaypee Brothers Medical Publishers (P) LTD.