Scope of the study: evaluation of aesthetic rehabilitation of the dental-maxillary apparatus functions by selecting a correct treatment variant and suitable materials of prosthetic restauration, granting the expected results, at a convenient quality/price ratio.
Materials and method. The study was performed on 25 male and female patients with ages ranging between 20 and 55 years. The subjects to whom aesthetic prosthetic (integrally ceramic or with ceramics on zirconium) restaurations were done suffered from odontal lesions, aesthetic defects caused by odontal repairs involving older obturations or by incorrectly fixed metallo-ceramic prosthetic restaurations.
Results and discussion. To correct the physiognomy and dental aesthetics, repairs and even implanto-prosthetic reconstructions were necessary. In cases with a fine, transparent gingival biotype, the integrally ceramic prosthetic restaurations were preferred, the prosthetic limit being placed juxtagingivally, or with a minimum subgingival hollowing. In the patients with a generous biotype and certain dental devitalization, or when a bridge of at least two elements was available, ceramic restauration on zirconium was applied.
Conclusions: Aesthetic restauration through either integrally ceramic or with ceramics on zirconium prosthetic repairs is superior to other techniques of aesthetic repair.