Clinical Oral Investigations

, Volume 23, Issue 2, pp 771–777 | Cite as

PEKK-made indirect temporary crowns and bridges: a clinical pilot study

  • T. Klur
  • Istabrak HasanEmail author
  • K. Ottersbach
  • H. Stark
  • M. Fichte
  • C. Dirk
  • C. Bourauel
Original Article



The aim of the present study was to find out whether the high-performance polymer PEKK is an equivalent alternative compared to cobalt chrome (CoCr)-made restorations, regarding to biocompatibility, stability, and comfort.

Materials and methods

Twenty-two patients (m, 10; f, 12) who were indicated for a long-term temporary-fixed restoration were included. They were randomized through a lottery procedure into two groups: the first group was restored with veneered PEKK-made crowns and bridges (Pekkton ivory), while the second group was restored with veneered CoCr crowns. Clinical parameters (plaque index (PI), probing depth (PD), fracture, and chipping) were documented in a period of 3–5 months from the insertion of restoration. Furthermore, every patient completed the OHIP-14 questionnaire. An exchange of the restorations from the first to the alternative material was performed after a period of 3–5 months.


All patients showed an improvement of the oral hygiene and probing depth after insertion of the temporary restorations. However, there were no significant differences between PEKK and CoCr-made restorations (P > 0.05). There was no chipping after 5 months for both kinds of materials. There was a noticeable reduction of pain and discomfort of patients after insertion of temporary restorations. However, there were no significant differences between the two materials (P > 0.05).


PEKK-made temporary restorations offer a good and stable alternative to CoCr-made restorations. They have a high aesthetical advantage over CoCr restoration.

Clinical relevance

Esthetic and price-efficient temporary crowns can be offered for the patient during periodontal therapy to improve its success, in particular by improving the oral hygiene.


Indirect temporary crowns Bridges PEKK CoCr 


Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Ethical approval

This article does not contain any studies with human participants or animals performed by any of the authors. All applicable international, national, and/or institutional guidelines for the care and use of animals were followed. All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and/or national research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards.

Informed consent

For this type of study, formal consent is not required. Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.


  1. 1.
    Wang A, Lin R, Stark C, Dumbleton J (1999) Suitability and limitations of carbon fiber reinforced PEEK composites as bearing surfaces for total joint replacements. Wear 225:724–727CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Kurtz SM, Devine JN (2017) PEEK biomaterials in trauma, orthopedic, and spinal implants. Biomaterials 28:4845–4869CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Brown T, Bao QB, Kilpela T, Songer M (2010) An in vitro biotribological assessment of NUBAC, a polyetheretherketone-on-polyetheretherketone articulating nucleus replacement device: methodology and results from a series of wear tests using different motion profiles, test frequencies, and environmental conditions. Spine 35:E774–E781CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Schwitalla AD, Zimmermann T, Spintig T, Kallage I, Müller WD (2017) Fatigue limits of different PEEK materials for dental implants. J Mech Behav Biomed Mater 69:263–168CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Alsadon OPS, Ood D, Patrick D (2015) Evaluation of the optical properties of PEKK based restorations. IADR/AADR/CADR General Session & Exhibition. T. U. o. Sheffield. Boston, Massachusetts, USA, At Boston, Massachusetts, USAGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Fuhrmann G, Steiner M, Freitag-Wolf S, Kern M (2014) Resin bonding to three types of polyaryletherketones (PAEKs)—durability and influence of surface conditioning. Dent Mater 30:357–363CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Keilig L, Stark H, Bourauel C (2016) Does the material stiffness of novel high-performance polymers for fixed partial dentures influence their biomechanical behavior? Int J Prosthodont 30:595–597CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Bae SY, Park JY, Jeong ID, Kim HY, Kim JH, Kim WC (2017) Three-dimensional analysis of marginal and internal fit of copings fabricated with polyetherketoneketone (PEKK) and zirconia. J Prosthodont Res 61:106–112CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Najeeb S, Zafar MS, Khurshid Z, Siddiqui F (2016) Applications of polyetheretherketone (PEEK) in oral implantology and prosthodontics. J Prosthodont Res 60:12–19CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Stawarczyk B, Beuer F, Wimmer T, Jahn D, Sener B, Roos M, Schmidlin PR (2013) Polyetheretherketone: a suitable material for fixed dental prostheses? J Biomed Mater Res B Appl Biomater 101:1209–1216CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Schmidlin PR, Stawarczyk B, Wieland M, Attin T, Hämmerle CH, Fischer J (2010) Effect of different surface pre-treatments and luting materials on shear bond strength to PEEK. Dent Mater 26:553–559CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Uhrenbacher J, Schmidlin PR, Keul C, Eichberger M, Roos M, Gernet W, Stawarczyk B (2014) The effect of surface modification on the retention strength of polyetheretherketone crowns adhesively bonded to dentin abutments. J Prosthet Dent 112:1489–1497CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • T. Klur
    • 1
  • Istabrak Hasan
    • 2
    • 3
    Email author
  • K. Ottersbach
    • 4
  • H. Stark
    • 3
  • M. Fichte
    • 3
  • C. Dirk
    • 2
  • C. Bourauel
    • 2
  1. 1.Department of OrthodonticsUniversity of CologneCologneGermany
  2. 2.Endowed Chair of Oral TechnologyRheinische Friedrich-Wilhelms UniversityBonnGermany
  3. 3.Department of Prosthetic Dentistry, Preclinical Education and Materials Science, Dental SchoolRheinische Friedrich-Wilhelms UniversityBonnGermany
  4. 4.Private practiceMechernichGermany

Personalised recommendations