-
Journal of Prosthodontic Research Jan 2018Several studies reported better outcomes when restoring edentulous mandible with unsplinted IODs compared to CCDs; however, it is not clear if these outcomes remain when... (Comparative Study)
Comparative Study Meta-Analysis
PURPOSE
Several studies reported better outcomes when restoring edentulous mandible with unsplinted IODs compared to CCDs; however, it is not clear if these outcomes remain when the full literature is considered. The aim of this systematic review is to compare conventional complete dentures (CCDs) to unsplinted implant-retained overdentures (IODs) with regard to efficacy, satisfaction and quality of life.
STUDY SELECTION
The main question addressed was: How do CCDs compare to unsplinted IODs with regard to efficacy, satisfaction and quality of life? Three databases were electronically searched to identify articles comparing CCD to unsplinted IOD. Twenty-six articles were selected and reviewed in full. Of these selected articles, twenty-five compared CCDs restoring function in both arches to a maxillary CCD opposing a mandibular IOD retained by two unsplinted implants. Only one articles compared a maxillary CCDs to a maxillary IOD.
RESULTS
Outcome measures varied among the studies, including the Oral Health Impact Profile (OHIP), visual analogue scales (VAS), and masticatory performance tests. Overall, IODs were associated with significantly better patient's masticatory performance and quality of life as indicated by Oral Health as Related to Quality of Life (OHRQoL). Mandibular unsplinted IODs were more likely than CCDs to be associated with improved OHRQoL for edentulous patients and were associated with significantly higher ratings of overall satisfaction, comfort, stability, ability to speak and ability to chew.
CONCLUSIONS
Results of this systematic review indicate the superiority of IODs retained by two unsplinted mandibular implants when compared to CCDs with regards to efficacy, satisfaction and quality of life.
Topics: Dental Implants; Dental Prosthesis, Implant-Supported; Denture Retention; Denture, Complete; Denture, Overlay; Humans; Jaw, Edentulous; Mandible; Mastication; Patient Satisfaction; Quality of Life
PubMed: 28666845
DOI: 10.1016/j.jpor.2017.06.004 -
BioMed Research International 2021Analyzing and comparing the fit and accuracy of removable partial denture (RPDs) frameworks fabricated with CAD/CAM and rapid prototyping methods with conventional...
OBJECTIVE
Analyzing and comparing the fit and accuracy of removable partial denture (RPDs) frameworks fabricated with CAD/CAM and rapid prototyping methods with conventional techniques.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
The present systematic review was carried out according to PRISMA guidelines. The search was carried out on PubMed/MEDLINE, Cochrane collaboration, Science direct, and Scopus scientific engines using selected MeSH keywords. The articles fulfilling the predefined selection criteria based on the fit and accuracy of removable partial denture (RPD) frameworks constructed from digital workflow (CAD/CAM; rapid prototyping) and conventional techniques were included.
RESULTS
Nine full-text articles comprising 6 in vitro and 3 in vivo studies were included in this review. The digital RPDs were fabricated in all articles by CAD/CAM selective laser sintering and selective laser melting techniques. The articles that have used CAD/CAM and rapid prototyping technique demonstrated better fit and accuracy as compared to the RPDs fabricated through conventional techniques. The least gaps between the framework and cast (41.677 ± 15.546 m) were found in RPDs constructed through digital CAD/CAM systems.
CONCLUSION
A better accuracy was achieved using CAD/CAM and rapid prototyping techniques. The RPD frameworks fabricated by CAD/CAM and rapid prototyping techniques had clinically acceptable fit, superior precision, and better accuracy than conventionally fabricated RPD frameworks.
Topics: Computer-Aided Design; Denture Design; Denture, Partial; Denture, Partial, Removable; Humans; Lasers; Workflow
PubMed: 34532499
DOI: 10.1155/2021/3194433 -
Journal of Prosthodontics : Official... Apr 2022The aim of this systematic review was to evaluate and compare three commonly used proportions that include the golden proportion, golden percentage, and Recurring... (Review)
Review
PURPOSE
The aim of this systematic review was to evaluate and compare three commonly used proportions that include the golden proportion, golden percentage, and Recurring Esthetic Dental (RED) proportion to identify which of the mathematical formulas, if any, can be used to provide predictable and repeatable esthetic clinical outcomes.
METHODS
A comprehensive search of electronic databases that included EBSCO, ProQuest, SCOPUS, Science Direct, Wiley, Google Scholar and PubMed was conducted using the terms: "golden proportion," "golden percentage," and "Recurring Esthetic Dental (RED) proportions" alone or in concurrence with one or both ensuing terms: "tooth proportions" and "esthetic tooth proportions." In addition, the following journals were hand searched for relevant articles: Journal of Prosthodontics, Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry and Journal of Esthetic and Restorative Dentistry. Related citations were also considered.
RESULTS
Tooth proportions varied substantially in the natural dentition. No studies revealed findings that supported the use of one mathematical formula to predict esthetic success. The golden proportion is present between the central to lateral incisor in some cases, but rarely between the lateral incisor and the canine. When compared to the other proportions, the golden percentage provided better starting points for tooth shape and size, but only when values were adjusted to consider other factors such as ethnicity and/or facial proportions.
CONCLUSION
Mathematical formulas did not provide consistent results that would allow for their use as a standardized guide for esthetically pleasing smiles. Although the golden percentage may be a good starting point if the percentages are adjusted on a case-by-case basis, generalized esthetic ideals cannot be determined by a mathematical formula and are open to interpretation by both the clinician and the patient.
Topics: Esthetics, Dental; Humans; Incisor; Maxilla; Odontometry; Prosthodontics
PubMed: 34463403
DOI: 10.1111/jopr.13420 -
The Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry Jan 2019Clinicians are currently unable to quantify the psychosocial, functional, and esthetic effects of prosthetic interventions to replace teeth. Understanding the effects of... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
STATEMENT OF PROBLEM
Clinicians are currently unable to quantify the psychosocial, functional, and esthetic effects of prosthetic interventions to replace teeth. Understanding the effects of treatment to replace teeth on oral health-related quality of life (OHRQoL) is important for informed consent. A systematic review of the evidence of OHRQoL improvements with prosthodontic tooth replacement and a comparison of outcomes between treatment modalities is therefore indicated.
PURPOSE
The purpose of this systematic review was to examine the OHRQoL of patients with partial edentulism after different dental prosthetic treatments.
MATERIAL AND METHODS
Electronic database and manual searches were conducted to identify cohort studies and clinical trials reporting on the OHRQoL of individuals receiving implant-supported crowns (ISCs), implant-supported fixed dental prostheses (IFDPs), implant-supported removable dental prostheses (IRDPs), tooth-supported fixed dental prostheses (TFDPs), and removable partial dentures (RPDs). Two reviewers independently conducted article selection, data extraction, and quality assessment. Random-effects models were used to compare OHRQoL change scores (standardized mean change, 95% confidence intervals).
RESULTS
Of the 2147 identified studies, 2 randomized controlled trials and 21 cohort studies met the inclusion criteria. Overall, studies were of low or moderate risk of bias. Pooled mean OHRQoL change ≤9 months was 15.3 for TFDP, 11.9 for RPD, and 14.9 for IFDP. Pooled standardized mean change OHRQoL change >9 months was 13.2 for TFDP and 15.8 for IFDP. Direct comparisons ≤9 months between TFDP against IFDP and RPD against IFDP significantly favored IFDP in both cases.
CONCLUSIONS
TFDP and IFDP had short- and long-term positive effects on OHRQoL. RPDs positively affected OHRQoL in the short term. IFDP showed greater short-term improvement in OHRQoL than RPD and TFDP.
Topics: Databases, Factual; Dental Implants; Dental Prosthesis, Implant-Supported; Denture, Partial, Fixed; Denture, Partial, Removable; Esthetics, Dental; Humans; Mouth, Edentulous; Oral Health; Quality of Life; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 30006220
DOI: 10.1016/j.prosdent.2018.03.003 -
Journal of Dentistry Sep 2019Management of carious teeth with signs and symptoms indicative of irreversible pulpitis is traditionally invasive, but emerging evidence suggests successful treatment...
OBJECTIVES
Management of carious teeth with signs and symptoms indicative of irreversible pulpitis is traditionally invasive, but emerging evidence suggests successful treatment outcomes with less invasive vital pulp treatment such as coronal pulpotomy. The objective of this systematic review is to determine whether coronal pulpotomy is clinically effective in treating carious teeth with signs and symptoms indicative of irreversible pulpitis.
SOURCES
MEDLINE; PubMed; Embase, Web of Science, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, International Clinical Trials Registry Platform and ClinicalTrials.gov were searched until December 2018.
STUDY SELECTION
Prospective, retrospective and randomised clinical trials investigating coronal pulpotomy or comparing pulpotomy to root canal treatment in permanent mature carious teeth with signs and symptoms indicative of irreversible pulpitis were included. Studies were independently assessed for risk of bias using Cochrane Systematic Reviews of intervention criteria and modified Downs and Black quality assessment checklist.
DATA
Eight articles were selected for analysis. The average success rate for coronal pulpotomy was 97.4% clinical and 95.4% radiographic at 12 month follow-up. This was reduced to 93.97% clinical and 88.39% radiographic success at 36 months follow-up. Results from the only comparative clinical trial showed pulpotomy to have comparable success to root canal treatment at 12, 24 and 60 month follow-up.
CONCLUSIONS
The evidence suggests high success for pulpotomy for teeth with signs and symptoms of irreversible pulpitis, however, results are based on heterogeneous studies with high risk of bias. Well-designed, adequately powered randomised controlled trials are required for evidence to change clinical practice.
CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE
Management of carious teeth with irreversible pulpitis is traditionally invasive, but emerging evidence suggests potentially successful treatment outcomes with less invasive therapies such as coronal pulpotomy.
Topics: Calcium Compounds; Dental Pulp Capping; Dental Pulp Exposure; Humans; Pulp Capping and Pulpectomy Agents; Pulpitis; Pulpotomy; Root Canal Therapy; Silicates
PubMed: 31229496
DOI: 10.1016/j.jdent.2019.06.005 -
European Journal of Oral Sciences Jun 2018The aim of this systematic review was to assess the effect of systematic extraction protocols during orthodontic fixed appliance treatment on the soft tissue profile of... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
The aim of this systematic review was to assess the effect of systematic extraction protocols during orthodontic fixed appliance treatment on the soft tissue profile of human patients. Nine databases were searched until December 2016 for controlled clinical studies including premolar extraction or nonextraction treatment. After elimination of duplicate studies, data extraction, and risk-of-bias assessment according to the Cochrane guidelines, random-effects meta-analyses of mean differences (MD) or standardized mean differences (SMD) and their 95% CIs were performed, followed by subgroup, meta-regression, and sensitivity analyses. Extraction treatment was associated with increased lower lip retraction (24 studies; 1,456 patients; MD = 1.96 mm), upper lip retraction (21 studies; 1,149 patients; MD = 1.26 mm), nasolabial angle (21 studies; 1,089 patients; MD = 4.21°), soft-tissue profile convexity (six studies; 408 patients; MD = 1.24°), and profile pleasantness (three studies; 249 patients; SMD = 0.41). Patient age, extraction protocol, and amount of upper incisor retraction during treatment were significantly associated with the observed extraction effects, while the quality of evidence was very low in all cases due to risk of bias, baseline confounding, inconsistency, and imprecision. Although tooth extractions seem to affect patient profile, existing studies are heterogenous and no consistent predictions of profile response can be made.
Topics: Adolescent; Adult; Age Factors; Bicuspid; Cephalometry; Esthetics, Dental; Face; Humans; Lip; Nose; Orthodontic Appliances, Fixed; Tooth Extraction; Tooth Movement Techniques
PubMed: 29480521
DOI: 10.1111/eos.12409 -
Journal of Clinical Periodontology Jan 2019To compare the clinical outcomes of ≤6 mm extra-short implants (test group) versus ≥10 mm long implants (control group), with and without bone augmentation procedures. (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
AIM
To compare the clinical outcomes of ≤6 mm extra-short implants (test group) versus ≥10 mm long implants (control group), with and without bone augmentation procedures.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
A systemic literature search of randomized clinical trials was performed using the PubMed (MEDLINE) and EMBASE databases. A quantitative meta-analysis was conducted to compare all the outcome variables. Meta-regression analysis determined the effect of bone augmentation procedures and the influence of other clinical covariates on the results.
RESULTS
Eighteen studies comprising 1,612 implants (793 extra-short and 820 long implants) were selected for the meta-analysis. No statistically significant difference in the survival rate was observed at 1 and 3 years (p > 0.05). Extra-short implants displayed less marginal bone loss (MBL) from both implant placement time points (1 and 3 years) and prosthetic placement (1 year), as well as less biological complications, surgical time and treatment cost (p < 0.05). Contrarily, a statistically significant small number of prosthetic complications were reported with long implants (p < 0.05).
CONCLUSIONS
Placement of extra-short implants (≤6 mm) presented as an equivalent option in the treatment of patients with an atrophic posterior arch up to 3-year follow-up. However, the long-term effectiveness of extra-short dental implants remains to be further studied.
Topics: Humans; Dental Implantation, Endosseous; Dental Implants; Dental Prosthesis Design; Dental Prosthesis, Implant-Supported; Dental Restoration Failure; Patient Reported Outcome Measures; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 30362137
DOI: 10.1111/jcpe.13026 -
The Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry Jul 2023Screwmentable prostheses were developed to combine the benefits of screw retention and cement retention. However, data are limited on the clinical performance of this... (Review)
Review
STATEMENT OF PROBLEM
Screwmentable prostheses were developed to combine the benefits of screw retention and cement retention. However, data are limited on the clinical performance of this type of prosthesis.
PURPOSE
The purpose of this systematic review was to collect scientific evidence on screwmentable prostheses and evaluate their long-term clinical behavior.
MATERIAL AND METHODS
An electronic search was conducted by 2 independent reviewers for articles published in scientific dental journals in English from 2004 to April 2020. The search strategy followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Inclusion criteria were scientific studies concerning the screwmentable type of prosthesis.
RESULTS
The search provided 494 records. Of these, 24 studies fulfilled the inclusion criteria and were included in the review. The included articles presented significant heterogeneity concerning the manufacturing process and the materials used. One randomized clinical trial, 2 prospective clinical studies, 14 in vitro studies, 3 protocol descriptions, 1 case series, and 3 case reports were included.
CONCLUSIONS
Based on the systematic search of the literature, it is concluded that the screwmentable prosthesis combines advantages of both cement-retained and screw-retained restorations, including passive fit, retrievability, excess cement control, tissue-friendly emergence profile, and improved esthetics. Nevertheless, data from well-designed clinical trials are limited, and further research is required to provide evidence on their long-term clinical behavior.
Topics: Dental Implants; Dental Prosthesis Retention; Prospective Studies; Dental Prosthesis, Implant-Supported; Esthetics, Dental; Dental Cements; Glass Ionomer Cements; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
PubMed: 34740460
DOI: 10.1016/j.prosdent.2021.08.027 -
Journal of Stomatology, Oral and... Oct 2022Systematic mapping review AIM AND SCOPE: The objective of this mapping review was to identify, describe, and organize clinical research currently available from...
STUDY DESIGN
Systematic mapping review AIM AND SCOPE: The objective of this mapping review was to identify, describe, and organize clinical research currently available from systematic reviews and primary studies regarding co-interventions and different surgical modalities used in orthognathic surgery (OS) and their outcomes.
METHODS
Systematic reviews (SRs), randomized controlled trials, and observational studies that evaluated perioperative OS co-interventions and surgical modalities were identified in an exhaustive search of MEDLINE, EMBASE, Epistemonikos, Lilacs, Web of Science, and CENTRAL. Grey literature was also screened.
RESULTS
Included were 35 SRs and 253 primary studies, 103 from SRs, and another 150 identified in our search. Overall, SR quality was rated as critically low, with only two SRs rated as of high quality. 19 questions on population, interventions, comparisons, and outcomes (PICO) extracted from the SRs focused on osteosynthesis methods, surgical cutting devices, and use of antibiotics, corticosteroids, and induced hypotension. Also identified were 15 research gaps. Evidence bubble maps were created to graphically depict the available evidence.
CONCLUSION
Future high-quality research, both primary and secondary, is needed to address the knowledge gaps identified in this systematic mapping review.
Topics: Adrenal Cortex Hormones; Anti-Bacterial Agents; Humans; Orthognathic Surgery; Orthognathic Surgical Procedures
PubMed: 35568120
DOI: 10.1016/j.jormas.2022.05.011 -
Journal of Cranio-maxillo-facial... Nov 2019A comprehensive literature search on implant placement protocols after tooth extraction (immediate, early, delayed, or later) was performed up to 2018. The screening... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
Which is the best choice after tooth extraction, immediate implant placement or delayed placement with alveolar ridge preservation? A systematic review and meta-analysis.
A comprehensive literature search on implant placement protocols after tooth extraction (immediate, early, delayed, or later) was performed up to 2018. The screening process selected only randomized clinical trials (RCTs) from PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, Scopus, LILACS, and grey literature. A series of pairwise meta-analyses was carried out to evaluate implant performance in each protocol. The primary outcomes were implant survival and esthetic outcome, measured by pink esthetic score (PES), and the secondary outcomes were peri-implant bone resorption and implant complications. The outcomes were at least 1 year after implant surgery. A total of 5056 studies were found, of which 16 were included for qualitative analysis and 9 for quantitative analysis. The meta-analysis showed increased risk of implant failure by 3% in the immediate implant protocol. PES analysis showed no statistical significant difference between immediate or delayed protocols (p = 0.16). However, the subgroup analysis showed that the anterior region presented better results with immediate implants, while the molar region presented better results with delayed implants. The quantitative analysis showed no statistical difference in peri-implant bone resorption between the immediate and delayed implant protocols (p = 0.42). Due to the lack of studies with a low risk of bias, further RCTs are needed for definitive conclusions.
Topics: Alveolar Process; Dental Implantation, Endosseous; Dental Implants; Dental Implants, Single-Tooth; Esthetics, Dental; Humans; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Time Factors; Tooth Extraction; Tooth Socket; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 31522823
DOI: 10.1016/j.jcms.2019.08.004