Objective: To analyze the literature on lithium disilicate and zirconia as prosthetic restorative materials. Resistance, survival, antagonistic wear, and its use in digital flow will be analyzed.

Methodology: An electronic search of articles published in the last 5 years was carried out through PubMed and Google Scholar, using the terms "lithium disilicate", "zirconia", "e. Max", "lithium disilicate vs zirconia".

Results: When choosing a restorative material such as zirconia or lithium disilicate, it should be considered: Strength: zirconia does not offer the same translucency characteristics as lithium disilicate. Survival in the medium and long term is possible as long as the minimum thickness of the material is respected. Antagonist wear: in zirconia, if it is well polished, that wear is minimal. Digital flow offers greater predictability and a better marginal fit.

Conclusions: Zirconia and lithium disilicate provide good strength and survival. Zirconia does not offer the same translucency characteristics as lithium disilicate and is therefore not as aesthetically pleasing, but it is much more resistant.