-
Journal of Conservative Dentistry : JCD 2022Advances in adhesive technologies and escalation in esthetic demands have increased indications for tooth-colored, partial coverage restorations. Recently, material... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Advances in adhesive technologies and escalation in esthetic demands have increased indications for tooth-colored, partial coverage restorations. Recently, material knowledge has evolved, new materials have been developed, and no systematic review has answered the question posed by practitioners: Is the clinical efficacy of resin or ceramic better, for inlay, onlay, and overlay in the long run?
AIM
The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to evaluate the clinical performance of ceramic and resin inlays, onlays, and overlays and to identify the complication types associated with the main clinical outcomes.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
Two reviewers (VN and AJ) searched PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Central registry of controlled trials for published articles between 1983 and 2020 conforming to Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses guidelines for systematic reviews. Only clinical studies which met the following criteria were included (1) studies regarding ceramic and resin inlays, onlays, and overlays were included; (2) randomized controlled trials, retrospective or prospective studies conducted in humans; (3) studies with a dropout rate <50% 4) studies with a follow-up higher than 5 years.
RESULTS
Of 1718 articles, 21 articles were selected. At 5 years, the estimated survival rates for resin ( = 129) was 86%, feldspathic porcelain ( = 1048) was 90%, and glass ceramic ( = 2218) was 92%; at 10 years, the survival of resin was 75% ( = 115), feldspathic porcelain was 91% ( = 1829), and glass ceramic was 89% ( = 1075).
CONCLUSION
The meta-regression indicated that ceramic partial coverage restorations (feldspathic porcelain and glass-ceramic) outperformed resin partial coverage restorations both at 5-year and 10-year follow-up. When compared between ceramic types, glass ceramics outperformed feldspathic porcelain at 5 years' follow-up and feldspathic porcelain outperformed glass ceramics at 10 years' follow-up. The failures were mostly due to fractures (6.2%), endodontic problems (3%), secondary caries (1.7%), and debonding which was 0.9%.
PubMed: 36187858
DOI: 10.4103/jcd.jcd_184_22 -
The Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry Mar 2020The restoration of extensively damaged endodontically treated teeth remains a challenge. The use of post-retained restorations has been questioned because of potential...
STATEMENT OF PROBLEM
The restoration of extensively damaged endodontically treated teeth remains a challenge. The use of post-retained restorations has been questioned because of potential tooth weakening.
PURPOSE
The purpose of this systematic review was to determine whether endocrowns are a reliable alternative to post-retained restorations for extensively damaged endodontically treated teeth and to determine which preparation design is most appropriate and which materials are best adapted for fabricating endocrowns.
MATERIAL AND METHODS
The literature that was analyzed covered endocrowns from 1995 to June 2018. A search was conducted for in vitro and clinical studies in English in 3 research databases (PubMed, Cochrane, and Scopus), and this was complemented by a manual search in the bibliographies of the studies found. Case reports were excluded.
RESULTS
A total of 41 publications consisting of 8 clinical studies and 33 in vitro studies were included in this systematic review. Several analysis parameters were identified: for the clinical studies, survival rate, failure modes, and clinical criteria; for the in vitro studies, fracture resistance, stress distribution, preparation criteria, and materials used.
CONCLUSIONS
Endocrowns are a reliable alternative to post-retained restorations for molars and seem promising for premolars. A certain preparation design and a rigorous adhesion protocol must be respected. Among the available materials, lithium disilicate glass-ceramic and nanofilled composite resin stand out.
Topics: Composite Resins; Crowns; Dental Porcelain; Dental Restoration Failure; Dental Stress Analysis; Humans; Materials Testing; Tooth, Nonvital
PubMed: 31353111
DOI: 10.1016/j.prosdent.2019.04.009 -
Clinical Oral Implants Research Jan 2022To analyze the clinical outcomes of all-ceramic single crowns (SCs) and fixed dental prostheses (FDPs) supported by ceramic implants. (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
OBJECTIVE
To analyze the clinical outcomes of all-ceramic single crowns (SCs) and fixed dental prostheses (FDPs) supported by ceramic implants.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
Based on a focused question and customized PICO framework, electronic (Medline/EMBASE/Cochrane) and manual searches for studies reporting the clinical outcomes of all-ceramic SCs and FDPs supported by ceramic implants ≥12 months were performed. The primary outcomes were reconstruction survival and the chipping proportion. The secondary outcomes were implant survival, technical complications, and patient-related outcome measurements. Meta-analyses were performed after 1, 2, and 5 years using random-effect meta-analyses.
RESULTS
Eight of the 1,403 initially screened titles and 55 full texts were included. Five reported on monolithic lithium disilicate (LS2) SCs, one on veneered zirconia SCs, and two on veneered zirconia SCs and FDPs, which reported all on cement-retained reconstructions (mean observation: 12.0-61.0 months). Meta-analyses estimated a 5-year survival rate of 94% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 82%-100%) for overall implant survival. Reconstruction survival proportions after 5 years were: monolithic LS2, 100% (95%CI: 95%-100%); veneered zirconia SCs, 89% (95%CI: 62%-100%); and veneered zirconia FDPs 94% (95%CI: 81%-100%). The chipping proportion after 5 years was: monolithic LS2, 2% (95%CI: 0%-11%); veneered zirconia SCs, 38% (95%CI: 24%-54%); and veneered zirconia FDPs, 57% (95%CI: 38%-76%). Further outcomes were summarized descriptively.
CONCLUSIONS
Due to the limited data available, only tendencies could be identified. All-ceramic reconstructions supported by ceramic implants demonstrated promising survival rates after mid-term observation. However, high chipping proportions of veneered zirconia SCs and, particularly, FDPs diminished the overall outcome. Monolithic LS2 demonstrated fewer clinical complications. Monolithic reconstructions could be a valid treatment option for ceramic implants.
Topics: Ceramics; Crowns; Dental Implants; Dental Porcelain; Dental Prosthesis Design; Dental Prosthesis, Implant-Supported; Dental Restoration Failure; Humans; Metal Ceramic Alloys; Zirconium
PubMed: 34665900
DOI: 10.1111/clr.13871 -
The Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry Feb 2021The polycrystalline nature of zirconia hinders its ability to bond to tooth structure. Consequently, durable bonding to zirconia has been challenging. In vitro studies... (Review)
Review
STATEMENT OF PROBLEM
The polycrystalline nature of zirconia hinders its ability to bond to tooth structure. Consequently, durable bonding to zirconia has been challenging. In vitro studies have evaluated various methods of bonding to zirconia, but clinical data are sparse.
PURPOSE
The purpose of this systematic review was to critically appraise clinical studies investigating the survival rate of resin-bonded zirconia fixed partial dentures (FPDs), inlay-retained zirconia FPDs, and zirconia veneers.
MATERIAL AND METHODS
Searches were performed in MEDLINE, EMBASE, PubMed, Web of Science, Scopus, Cochrane Library, and Google Scholar. Clinical studies of over 12 months duration involving bonded zirconia restorations between 1990 and July 2018 were reviewed. All suitable studies were assessed for quality by using a "Questionnaire for selecting articles on Dental Prostheses".
RESULTS
Eight studies were ultimately included. Three studies examined posterior inlay-retained FPDs with estimated survival rates of 12.1% at 10 years, 95.8% at 5 years, and 100% at 20 months. Five studies reviewed anterior, resin-bonded FPDs, all of which had a 3- to 10-year survival rate of 100%. Debonds occurred in all studies, but the prostheses could usually be rebonded.
CONCLUSIONS
With correctly designed buccal and lingual coverage retainers and minimal if any veneering porcelain, zirconia-based, posterior, inlay-retained FPDs seem to have a high clinical survival rate. The role of bonding efficacy in this survival rate is unknown. Anterior, cantilevered, resin-bonded zirconia FPDs seem to have a high clinical survival rate. While these prostheses can debond, fracture of the entire prosthesis is unlikely, so they may be rebonded. To bond zirconia, the use of airborne-particle abrasion with 50-μm alumina (AlO) at 0.1 to 0.25 MPa in combination with a phosphate monomer-containing adhesive resin is recommended until further studies become available. Dental dam isolation is also recommended during zirconia bonding.
Topics: Dental Bonding; Dental Materials; Dental Porcelain; Denture Design; Denture, Partial, Fixed; Treatment Outcome; Zirconium
PubMed: 32115220
DOI: 10.1016/j.prosdent.2019.12.017 -
Operative Dentistry Jan 2021Composite resin or ceramic inlays, onlays, and overlays can achieve high long-term survival and success rates. (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
CLINICAL RELEVANCE
Composite resin or ceramic inlays, onlays, and overlays can achieve high long-term survival and success rates.
Topics: Ceramics; Composite Resins; Dental Porcelain; Inlays
PubMed: 33882133
DOI: 10.2341/19-107-LIT -
Clinical and Experimental Dental... Dec 2022This systematic review aims to investigate the effect of different preparation designs on the marginal fit and fracture strength of ceramic occlusal veneers. (Review)
Review
OBJECTIVES
This systematic review aims to investigate the effect of different preparation designs on the marginal fit and fracture strength of ceramic occlusal veneers.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
Based on the PICO question and the search terms, an electronic search was performed in Google Scholar, PubMed (MEDLINE), Scopus, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, Science Direct, Wiley, Ovid, and SAGE for articles published up to July 2022. After including English in vitro studies that evaluated posterior ceramic occlusal overlays at the posterior with ceramic restorations by following the PRISMA statement, the extracted data was tabulated. The methodological quality of the included studies was evaluated. Risk of bias assessment was done independently by two authors using the modified MINORS scale.
RESULTS
About 3138 search results were screened, of which 22 were selected due to their titles. Twenty-one full-text articles were assessed for eligibility. Seventeen in-vitro studies were finalized for the extraction of quantitative data. All 17 articles had a low risk of bias and were retained. The influencing items for evaluating the research were different in most studies; therefore, qualitative synthesis of the results was feasible. They generally included preparation design, material thickness, depth of preparation in the tooth, internal divergence angle, and finish line. Meta-analysis was not done due to heterogeneity of preparation types and evaluation methods. Results revealed that fracture resistance of occlusal veneers is higher than normal mastication force, and it is sufficient to prepare the occlusal surface, use a self-etching primer for bonding, and an acceptable minimum ceramic thickness. The marginal discrepancy of occlusal veneers is clinically acceptable. However, this systematic review faces some limitations due to the lack of in vivo studies, different preparation designs in included studies, different follow-ups, and lack of comprehensive explanations in articles.
CONCLUSIONS
The preparation design of occlusal veneers influences both marginal adaptation and fracture resistance. Various preparation designs are proven to have clinically acceptable fracture strength and marginal adaptation.
Topics: Dental Porcelain; Dental Veneers; Flexural Strength; Dental Stress Analysis; Materials Testing; Ceramics
PubMed: 36062841
DOI: 10.1002/cre2.653 -
Journal of Prosthodontics : Official... Oct 2022The purpose of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to evaluate the effect of using additive manufacturing (AM) for dental ceramic fabrication in comparison with... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
PURPOSE
The purpose of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to evaluate the effect of using additive manufacturing (AM) for dental ceramic fabrication in comparison with subtractive manufacturing (SM), and to evaluate the effect of the type of AM technology on dental ceramic fabrication.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
A search was conducted electronically in MEDLINE (via PubMed), EBSCOhost, Scopus, and Cochran Library databases, and also by other methods (table of contents screening, backward and forward citations, and grey literature search) up to February 12, 2022, to identify records evaluating additive manufacturing of ceramics for dental purposes in comparison with subtractive manufacturing. A minimum of 2 review authors conducted tstudy selection, quality assessment, and data extraction. Quality assessment was performed with Joanna Briggs Institute tool, and the quantitative synthesis was performed with the Comprehensive Meta-Analysis program (CMA, Biostat Inc). Hedges's g for effect size was calculated, with 0.2 as small, 0.5 as medium, and 0.8 as large. Heterogeneity was assessed with I and prediction interval (PI) statistics. Publication bias was investigated with funnel plots and grey literature search. Certainty of evidence was assessed with the Grading of Recommendations: Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) tool.
RESULTS
A total of 28 studies were included for the qualitative and quantitative synthesis; 11 in vitro studies on accuracy, 1 in vivo study on color, and 16 in vitro studies on physical and mechanical properties. Meta-analysis showed overall higher accuracy for SM compared with AM, with medium effect size (0.679, CI: 0.173 to 1.185, p = 0.009) and also for marginal (g = 1.05, CI: 0.344 to 1.760, p = 0.004), occlusal (g = 2.24, CI: 0.718 to 3.766, p = 0.004), and total (g = 4.544, CI: -0.234 to 9.323, p = 0.062) with large effect size; whereas AM had higher accuracy than SM with small effect size for the external (g = -0.238, CI: -1.215 to 0.739), p = 0.633), and internal (g = -0.403, CI: -1.273 to 0.467, p = 0.364) surfaces. For technology, self-glazed zirconia protocol had the smallest effect size (g = -0.049, CI: -0.878 to 0.78, p = 0.907), followed by stereolithography (g = 0.305, CI: -0.289 to 0.9, p = 0.314), and digital light processing (g = 1.819, CI: 0.662 to 2.976, p = 0.002) technologies. Flexural strength was higher for ceramics made by SM in comparison to AM with large effect size (g = -2.868, CI: -4.371 to -1.365, p < 0.001). Only 1 study reported on color, favoring ceramics made through combined AM and SM.
CONCLUSIONS
Subtractive manufacturing had better overall accuracy, particularly for the marginal and occlusal areas, higher flexural strength, and more favorable hardness, fracture toughness, porosity, fatigue, and volumetric shrinkage; whereas AM had more favorable elastic modulus and wettability. Both methods had favorable biocompatibility. All studies on accuracy and mechanical properties were in vitro, with high heterogeneity and low to very low certainty of evidence. There is a lack of studies on color match and esthetics.
Topics: Computer-Aided Design; Esthetics, Dental; Zirconium; Ceramics; Flexural Strength; Stereolithography; Materials Testing; Dental Porcelain; Surface Properties
PubMed: 35675133
DOI: 10.1111/jopr.13553 -
Cureus Nov 2022This study aimed to systematically review the literature to evaluate the marginal adaptation of veneers using different fabrication methods, namely, conventional... (Review)
Review
This study aimed to systematically review the literature to evaluate the marginal adaptation of veneers using different fabrication methods, namely, conventional feldspathic porcelain laminate veneers (PLVs), computer-aided design-computer-aided machining (CAD-CAM) veneers, and pressed veneers. A comprehensive literature search was performed using electronic databases (PubMed and Google Scholar) as well as hand searches to identify all relevant studies related to veneers and marginal adaptation. The identified studies were screened for assessing the inclusion and exclusion criteria. The included articles were then subjected to data extraction and analysis. The search resulted in 130 articles, of which six were included in this systematic review. All included articles were assessed for adaptation of margins. Based on the findings of this systematic review, no significant differences were found in the marginal adaptation of CAD-CAM and conventional feldspathic PLVs. The marginal fidelity of ceramic veneers issuing from the various fabrication techniques was clinically acceptable.
PubMed: 36579272
DOI: 10.7759/cureus.31885 -
The Journal of Evidence-based Dental... Dec 2023The aim of this systematic review was to evaluate the survival and complication rates of resin composite laminate veneers. (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
OBJECTIVES
The aim of this systematic review was to evaluate the survival and complication rates of resin composite laminate veneers.
METHODS
Randomized controlled trials and cohort studies with a minimum 2-year follow-up assessing survival and complication rates of resin composite laminate veneers on permanent dentition from 1998 to May 2022. Literature searches were conducted in MEDLINE (PubMed), Scopus, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials electronic databases. References cited in the related reviews and included full-text articles were also hand-searched to further identify potentially relevant studies.
RESULTS
A total of 827 articles were identified. Twenty-two studies were considered for full-text review after the title and abstract screening stage. After exclusion, 7 studies (3 randomized controlled trials and 4 cohort studies) were included in the systematic review. Three published scales were adopted for the quality and risk of bias assessment. At the survival rate threshold, the overall heterogeneity (I) for randomized controlled trials was 50.5% (P = .108). The overall pooled survival rate of the randomized controlled trials was 88% (95% CI: 81%-94%), with the mean follow-up time ranging from 24 to 97 months. Surface roughness, color mismatch, and marginal discoloration were the most reported complications.
CONCLUSION
Resin composite laminate veneers demonstrated moderately high survival rates for the entire sample and the direct laminate veneer group demonstrated higher survival rates than the indirect approach. Most of the complications were regarded as clinically acceptable with or without reintervention.
Topics: Humans; Dental Porcelain; Composite Resins; Dental Restoration Failure
PubMed: 38035903
DOI: 10.1016/j.jebdp.2023.101911 -
Journal of Clinical Medicine Nov 2022This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to evaluate the wear of the antagonist tooth in ceramic restorations. (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to evaluate the wear of the antagonist tooth in ceramic restorations.
MATERIAL AND METHODS
This study was carried out based on Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-analysis (PRISMA) recommendations; it was also registered in PROSPERO (register number: CRD42022316252). Three databases were consulted in the literature search, Embase, Scopus, and Web of Science. The citation searching was conducted by two researchers independently. The clinical studies that evaluated wear in antagonist teeth concerning ceramic restoration were included. Twelve articles were selected after eliminating duplicates ones and applying the inclusion criteria, and two were chosen through citation. Fourteen articles were considered for the qualitative and quantitative analysis (meta-regression and meta-analysis).
RESULTS
The mean linear wear of the antagonist tooth in relation to feldspathic was 8.914 μm, for lithium disilicate it was 0.018 μm, and for zirconia it was 0.257 μm. The mean volumetric wear of the antagonist tooth in relation to feldspathic was 0.273 mm, for hybrid ceramic it was 0.030 mm, for lithium disilicate it was 0.018 mm, and for zirconia it was 0.014 mm. The mean natural tooth wear was 0.7974 μm per month. Tooth wear caused by zirconia at six months was 31.755 μm, at 12 months it was 24.648 μm, and at 24 months it was 20.662 μm.
CONCLUSIONS
Feldspathic produces greater wear of the antagonist tooth from ceramic restorations linearly and volumetrically. In addition, zirconia generates the least wear that will decrease over time, and it will be equal to or less than the natural wear in the tooth.
PubMed: 36362777
DOI: 10.3390/jcm11216547