后牙种植修复中氧化锆陶瓷应用效果的文献计量学分析

doi:10.13701/j.cnki.kqyxyj.2025.10.006

摘要/Abstract

摘要： 目的: 探讨国内外近二十年氧化锆陶瓷在后牙种植修复中应用的研究现状、热点主题及发展趋势。方法: 检索2004~2024年Web of Science核心合集中有关后牙种植修复中氧化锆陶瓷应用效果评估的文献,结合VOSviewer 1.6.20与CiteSpace 6.1.R2软件,绘制作者合作网络、关键词共现和研究热点演化时间线等可视化知识图谱并进行回顾性计量分析。结果: 经筛选后共纳入95篇文献,涉及22个国家、131家机构,发文量自2012年起显著增长,高频关键词反映出该领域对材料力学性能、美学特性以及数字化加工技术的高度关注。时间线图分析显示,研究主题逐渐由材料本身转向临床应用效果,包括整体式氧化锆修复体的临床适应性评估与长期存活率研究。共被引文献主要集中于系统综述与临床试验,重点探讨修复体强度、美观持久性及并发症控制,是该领域知识结构的核心组成。国际合作层面,当前尚未建立稳定的跨国合作网络,整体研究呈分散趋势,国内多以单一机构为主,国际协作基础仍较薄弱。结论: 氧化锆陶瓷因其优异的生物相容性与力学性能,已成为后牙种植修复的重要材料。未来研究将进一步聚焦其磨损机制、美学性能优化以及在不同临床场景中的长期效果评估,同时需加强多国协作与技术融合,以推动材料优化与修复策略升级。

关键词: 种植修复, 氧化锆, 疗效评估, 文献计量学, 可视化分析

Abstract: Objective: To explore the current status, research hotspots, and development trends of zirconia ceramics in posterior implant restorations in the past two decades (2004-2024). Methods: Literature from 2004 to 2024 was retrieved from the Web of Science Core Collection. VOSviewer 1.6.20 and CiteSpace 6.1.R2 were used to conduct retrospective bibliometric analysis and generate visual maps of author collaboration, keyword co-occurrence, and topic evolution. Results: A total of 95 articles from 22 countries and 131 institutions were included. The number of publications increased significantly after 2012. Frequent keywords indicated a strong focus on mechanical properties, esthetic performance, and digital manufacturing. Topic evolution showed a shift from material-focused studies to clinical outcomes, particularly the performance and long-term survival of monolithic zirconia restorations. The co-citation publications mainly focuses on systematic reviews and clinical trials, focusing on restoration strength, aesthetic durability and complication control, which are the core components of the knowledge structure in this field. International collaboration remains limited, with Chinese research mostly conducted by single institutions. Conclusion: Zirconia ceramics has become a key material for posterior implant restorations. Future studies should focus on wear behavior, esthetic optimization, and long-term clinical performance, along with strengthened global collaboration and technological integration.

Key words: implant restoration, zirconia, efficacy evaluation, bibliometrics, visual analysis

苏强, 赵巍, 杨筠, 李怡乔, 刘瑞瑞. 后牙种植修复中氧化锆陶瓷应用效果的文献计量学分析[J]. 口腔医学研究, 2025, 41(10): 867-874.

SU Qiang, ZHAO Wei, YANG Yun, LI Yiqiao, LIU Ruirui. Bibliometric Analysis of Clinical Efficacy of Zirconia Ceramics in Posterior Implant Restorations[J]. Journal of Oral Science Research, 2025, 41(10): 867-874.

参考文献

[1] Mohajerani H, Roozbayani R, Taherian S, et al. The risk factors in early failure of dental implants: a retrospective study [J]. J Dent (Shiraz), 2017, 18(4): 298-303.
[2] Priest GF. Failure rates of restorations for single-tooth replacement [J]. Int J Prosthodont, 1996, 9(1): 38-45.
[3] Goodacre CJ, Bernal G, Rungcharassaeng K, et al. Clinical complications with implants and implant prostheses [J]. J Prosthet Dent, 2003, 90(2): 121-132.
[4] 章惠娅,林国芬,管叶,等.种植体早期失败的相关因素分析[J].口腔医学,2020,40(6): 526-530.
[5] Takaichi A, Fueki K, Murakami N, et al. A systematic review of digital removable partial dentures. Part Ⅱ: CAD/CAM framework, artificial teeth, and denture base [J]. J Prosthodont Res, 2022, 66(1): 53-67.
[6] Shadid R, Sadaqa N. A comparison between screw- and cement-retained implant prostheses. A literature review [J]. J Oral Implantol, 2012, 38(3): 298-307.
[7] 高俊宽.文献计量学方法在科学评价中的应用探讨[J].图书情报知识,2005,22(2): 14-17.
[8] van Eck NJ, Waltman L. Software survey: VOSviewer, a computer program for bibliometric mapping [J]. Scientometrics, 2010, 84(2): 523-538.
[9] Chen C. CiteSpace Ⅱ: Detecting and visualizing emerging trends and transient patterns in scientific literature [J]. J Am Soc Inf Sci Technol, 2006, 57(3): 359-377.
[10] 王声培,云雅娟.洛特卡定律、普赖斯定律和我国数学科学文献[J].图书情报工作,1994,38(3): 21-24.
[11] Honda J, Komine F, Kamio S, et al. Fracture resistance of implant-supported screw-retained zirconia-based molar restorations [J]. Clin Oral Implants Res, 2017, 28(9): 1119-1126.
[12] Kondo T, Komine F, Honda J, et al. Effect of veneering materials on fracture loads of implant-supported zirconia molar fixed dental prostheses [J]. J Prosthodont Res, 2019, 63(2): 140-144.
[13] Takano R, Honda J, Kobayashi T, et al. Fracture strength of implant-supported hybrid abutment crowns in premolar region fabricated using different restorative CAD/CAM materials [J]. Dent Mater J, 2023, 42(2): 187-192.
[14] Moriya Y, Komine F, Honda J, et al. Effect of luting agent type on fracture loads of implant-supported ceramic premolar prostheses [J]. Dent Mater J, 2020, 39(5): 869-876.
[15] Sadowsky SJ. Has zirconia made a material difference in implant prosthodontics? A review [J]. Dent Mater, 2020, 36(1): 1-8.
[16] Preis V, Hahnel S, Behr M, et al. In-vitro fatigue and fracture testing of CAD/CAM-materials in implant-supported molar crowns [J]. Dent Mater, 2017, 33(4): 427-433.
[17] Rezende CE, Borges AF, Gonzaga CC, et al. Effect of cement space on stress distribution in Y-TZP based crowns [J]. Dent Mater, 2017, 33(2): 144-151.
[18] Sornsuwan T, Ellakwa A, Swain MV. Occlusal geometrical considerations in all-ceramic pre-molar crown failure testing [J]. Dent Mater, 2011, 27(11): 1127-1134.
[19] Pjetursson BE, Valente NA, Strasding M, et al. A systematic review of the survival and complication rates of zirconia-ceramic and metal-ceramic single crowns [J]. Clin Oral Implants Res, 2018, 29(S16): 199-214.
[20] Kaleli N, Sarac D, Külünk S, et al. Effect of different restorative crown and customized abutment materials on stress distribution in single implants and peripheral bone: A three-dimensional finite element analysis study [J]. J Prosthet Dent, 2018, 119(3): 437-445.
[21] Rosentritt M, Hahnel S, Engelhardt F, et al. In vitro performance and fracture resistance of CAD/CAM-fabricated implant supported molar crowns [J]. Clin Oral Investig, 2017, 21(4): 1213-1219.
[22] Jung RE, Zembic A, Pjetursson BE, et al. Systematic review of the survival rate and the incidence of biological, technical, and aesthetic complications of single crowns on implants reported in longitudinal studies with a mean follow-up of 5 years [J]. Clin Oral Implants Res, 2012, 23 Suppl 6: 2-21.
[23] Jung RE, Pjetursson BE, Glauser R, et al. A systematic review of the 5-year survival and complication rates of implant-supported single crowns [J]. Clin Oral Implants Res, 2008, 19(2): 119-130.
[24] 陈悦,陈超美,刘则渊,等.CiteSpace知识图谱的方法论功能[J].科学学研究,2015,33(2): 242-253.
[25] Denry I, Kelly JR. State of the art of zirconia for dental applications [J]. Dent Mater, 2008, 24(3): 299-307.
[26] Yesilyurt NG, Tuncdemir AR. An evaluation of the stress effect of different occlusion concepts on hybrid abutment and implant supported monolithic zirconia fixed prosthesis: A finite element analysis [J]. J Adv Prosthodont, 2021, 13(4): 216.
[27] Box VH, Sukotjo C, Knoernschild KL, et al. Patient-reported and clinical outcomes of implant-supported fixed complete dental prostheses: a comparison of metal-acrylic, milled zirconia, and retrievable crown prostheses [J]. J Oral Implantol, 2018, 44(1): 51-61.
[28] Donmez MB, Diken Turksayar AA, Olcay EO, et al. Fracture resistance of single-unit implant-supported crowns: effects of prosthetic design and restorative material [J]. J Prosthodont, 2022, 31(4): 348-355.
[29] Mühlemann S, Lakha T, Jung RE, et al. Prosthetic outcomes and clinical performance of CAD-CAM monolithic zirconia versus porcelain-fused-to-metal implant crowns in the molar region: 1-year results of a RCT [J]. Clin Oral Implants Res, 2020, 31(9): 856-864.
[30] Zumstein K, Waller T, Hämmerle CHF, et al. Clinical performance of monolithic zirconia crowns on titanium-zirconium reduced-diameter implants in the molar area: Interim data at three years of a randomized controlled trial [J]. Clin Oral Implants Res, 2023, 34(12): 1354-1362.
[31] Habibi Y, Dawid M, Waldecker M, et al. Three-year clinical performance of monolithic and partially veneered zirconia ceramic fixed partial dentures [J]. J Esthet Restor Dent, 2020, 32(4): 395-402.
[32] Cheng C, Chien C, Chen C, et al. Clinical results and technical complications of posterior implant-supported modified monolithic zirconia single crowns and short-span fixed dental prostheses: A 2-year pilot study [J]. J Prosthodont, 2018, 27(2): 108-114.
[33] Beck F, Zupancic Cepic L, Lettner S, et al. Clinical and radiographic outcomes of single implant-supported zirconia crowns following a digital and conventional workflow: Four-year follow-up of a randomized controlled clinical trial [J]. J Clin Med, 2024, 13(2): 432.
[34] Derksen W, Tahmaseb A, Wismeijer D. A randomized clinical trial comparing the clinical fit of CAD/CAM monolithic zirconia fixed dental prostheses on ti-base abutments based on digital or conventional impression techniques: 1-year follow-up [J]. Int J Prosthodont, 2021, 34(6): 733-743.
[35] De Angelis P, Passarelli PC, Gasparini G, et al. Monolithic CAD-CAM lithium disilicate versus monolithic CAD-CAM zirconia for single implant-supported posterior crowns using a digital workflow: A 3-year cross-sectional retrospective study [J]. J Prosthet Dent, 2020, 123(2): 252-256.
[36] Salem MT, El-Layeh M, El-Farag SAA, et al. Clinical assessment of different implant-supported esthetic crown systems fabricated with semi-digital workflow: Two-year prospective study [J]. J Esthet Restor Dent, 2022, 34(8): 1247-1262.