-
The Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry Dec 2023Photodynamic therapy is widely used in dentistry, but limited evidence exists regarding its effectiveness in treating denture stomatitis. High resistance to antifungals... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
STATEMENT OF PROBLEM
Photodynamic therapy is widely used in dentistry, but limited evidence exists regarding its effectiveness in treating denture stomatitis. High resistance to antifungals has been reported, and photodynamic therapy could be an alternative treatment.
PURPOSE
The purpose of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to evaluate whether photodynamic therapy is effective in reducing denture stomatitis.
MATERIAL AND METHODS
A systematic review was conducted based on the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) checklist and recorded in the prospective register of systematic reviews (PROSPERO) (CRD42020205589) to answer the population, intervention, control, outcome (PICO) question: "Is photodynamic therapy effective in the treatment of denture stomatitis when compared with the use of antifungal agents?" Electronic searches were performed in databases PubMed/MEDLINE, Cochrane library, and Web of Science for articles published until February 2021 by using the following terms: (denture stomatitis OR oral candidiasis) AND (low-level light therapy OR laser therapy OR lasers OR photodynamic therapies OR photochemotherapy) AND (antifungal drugs OR antifungal agents OR antimicrobial OR treatment). Clinical trials and randomized clinical trials, studies in the English language, and studies comparing antifungal agents with photodynamic therapy were included.
RESULTS
In total, 5 articles were selected for the qualitative analysis and 3 for the meta-analysis. No significant difference was detected between antifungal therapy and photodynamic therapy in the reduction of colony-forming units on the palate. In a subgroup analysis, a significant difference was found in the reduction of colony-forming units on the palate at 15 days and at the denture surface at 30 days.
CONCLUSIONS
Photodynamic therapy is effective in the treatment of denture stomatitis, but after 30 days and 15 days, the antifungals demonstrated better performance.
Topics: Humans; Antifungal Agents; Stomatitis, Denture; Candidiasis, Oral; Photochemotherapy; Anti-Infective Agents
PubMed: 35125209
DOI: 10.1016/j.prosdent.2021.11.028 -
The Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry Apr 2021Patients and clinicians are aware of the efficacy and benefits of complete dentures, but evidence regarding their longevity is limited. (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
STATEMENT OF PROBLEM
Patients and clinicians are aware of the efficacy and benefits of complete dentures, but evidence regarding their longevity is limited.
PURPOSE
The purpose of this systematic review was to examine the literature describing the longevity of complete dentures and to review variations in longevity by denture type and duration of follow-up.
MATERIAL AND METHODS
Four electronic databases were searched by using key terms: MEDLINE, CINAHL (EBSCO), Dentistry and Oral Sciences Databases, and The Cochrane Library. Studies meeting the inclusion criteria were reviewed according to an established protocol and data extracted. Reference lists of identified studies were examined. Risk of bias was assessed by using the AXIS tool. Weighted means and weighted standard deviations were calculated. Pooled complete denture failure proportions were estimated by using random effects models based on the DerSimonian and Laird method.
RESULTS
The search yielded 21 607 unique abstracts, of which 273 met the inclusion criteria. Assessment of the full-text articles reduced this number to 42. Of these, 24 studies were rated as having low risk of bias and 18 as very low. The weighted mean ±standard deviation longevity of maxillary complete dentures was 10.3 ±3.8 years, of mandibular dentures was 8.6 ±2.6 years, and of both maxillary and mandibular dentures was 10.8 ±4.7 years. The pooled failure proportion for complete dentures observed for 2 years or less was 0.05 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.00-0.10), 5 to 6 years was 0.12 (95% CI: 0.08-0.16), and 10 years or more was 0.41 (95% CI: 0.28-0.53).
CONCLUSIONS
Complete dentures, fabricated primarily in university settings, were found to have a weighted mean ±standard deviation longevity of 10.1 ±4.0 years. The failure rate of these prostheses increased with denture age, and the longevity of maxillary dentures was greater than that of mandibular dentures.
Topics: Denture, Complete; Humans; Mandible; Maxilla
PubMed: 32359852
DOI: 10.1016/j.prosdent.2020.02.019 -
The Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry Mar 2023Providing a removable partial denture (RPD) can be a complex, time-consuming, and error-prone procedure. Computer-aided design and computer-aided manufacturing (CAD-CAM)... (Review)
Review
STATEMENT OF PROBLEM
Providing a removable partial denture (RPD) can be a complex, time-consuming, and error-prone procedure. Computer-aided design and computer-aided manufacturing (CAD-CAM) techniques have shown promising clinical outcomes; however, the influence of manufacturing techniques on the properties of RPD components is unclear.
PURPOSE
The purpose of this systematic review was to determine the accuracy and mechanical properties of RPD components fabricated with conventional and digital methods.
MATERIAL AND METHODS
This study followed the guidelines of the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) and was registered on the international prospective register of systematic reviews (PROSPERO) database (CRD42022353993). An electronic search was conducted on PubMed/MEDLINE, Scopus, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Library in August 2022. Only in vitro studies comparing the digital with the lost-wax casting technique were included. The quality of the studies was assessed by using the methodological index for nonrandomized studies (MINORS) scale.
RESULTS
Of the 17 selected studies, 5 evaluated the accuracy of RPD components as well as the mechanical properties, 5 studies evaluated only the component accuracy, and another 7 evaluated only the mechanical properties. The accuracy was similar regardless of the technique, with discrepancies within clinically acceptable values (50 to 426.3 μm). The surface roughness was higher for 3D-printed clasps and lower for milled clasps (P<.05). The metal alloy significantly influenced the porosity, with the highest number of pores obtained by casting for Ti clasps and by rapid prototyping for Co-Cr clasps.
CONCLUSIONS
In vitro studies showed that the digital technique provided similar accuracy to that of the conventional technique within a clinically acceptable range. The manufacturing technique influenced the mechanical properties of RPD components.
PubMed: 36870892
DOI: 10.1016/j.prosdent.2023.01.032 -
Journal of Oral Biology and... 2023Though, mechanical dental implant and supported prosthesis failures are considered significant, a comprehensive evaluation is lacking. A systematic review analyzing... (Review)
Review
PURPOSE
Though, mechanical dental implant and supported prosthesis failures are considered significant, a comprehensive evaluation is lacking. A systematic review analyzing different aspects related to such failures was therefore done.
METHODS
Electronic search was carried out in PubMed/MEDLINE and Cochrane Library for articles published between 1981 and 2021. Articles were selected using predefined criteria. Data extraction was based on mechanical complications associated with dental implants, prosthetic implant failures, survival rate of implants, mechanical failure of implants placed in the maxilla and mandible, and mechanical complications associated with implant supported over dentures. Quality of included studies was assessed. Meta-analysis for heterogenicity testing, publication bias and implant failure assessment was conducted using MedCalc® Statistical Software version 19.7.
RESULTS
Eighteen retrospective and prospective studies were included following PRISMA guidelines. Mechanical complications were more in the initial 9 years but reduced later. Abutment screw loosening was one of the more common mechanical complications (16.21%). Maxillary implant failure was greater compared to mandibular implant failure with an odds ratio of 4.66 (95% CI -3.21- 6.75). Failure of implant supported overdentures due to mechanical complications were 3% in the fixed effect, and 2.9% in the random effect model ( < 0.05). The overall prevalence of mechanical failure was between 5.6% and 7.7% (P < 0.05).
CONCLUSION
Mechanical failures of implant and supported prosthesis have similar prevalence to biological and esthetic failures, and therefore need to be given due credence. Identifying specific factors contributing to such failures can help reduce incidence.
PubMed: 36923071
DOI: 10.1016/j.jobcr.2023.02.009 -
Cureus Nov 2022This article aims to evaluate different methods and techniques published in the literature for tripodization in removable partial dentures. The systematic review was... (Review)
Review
This article aims to evaluate different methods and techniques published in the literature for tripodization in removable partial dentures. The systematic review was conducted according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Electronic databases like PubMed, Cochrane Library, and Science Direct were searched for manuscripts published till August 15, 2021. An electronic search was restricted to the English language of the publications to identify the relevant articles on tripoding techniques in removable partial dentures. A hand search was also carried out. A total of 18 articles were included in this systematic review. The documented 18 articles associated with the tripoding techniques were reviewed systematically. Accurate repositioning of a cast on the surveyor is a critical step in the fabrication of a removable prosthesis. Based on the ease of use and no modifications to the existing cast, the "tripoder attachment" and "swiveling device" can be concluded to be superior to others. Once constructed, these devices are easy to use, can be operated for various patients, do not modify or damage the cast, and can be stored and disinfected for repeated use.
PubMed: 36475130
DOI: 10.7759/cureus.31095 -
Brazilian Oral Research 2020Here, the prevalence of oral candidiasis and denture stomatitis among diabetic patients compared to healthy ones was summarized through a systematic review with... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
Here, the prevalence of oral candidiasis and denture stomatitis among diabetic patients compared to healthy ones was summarized through a systematic review with meta-analysis. Medline, Scopus, Web of Science, Lilacs, Cochrane Library, Embase, and the grey literature were searched without restriction, until May 2020. Eligibility criteria were established, data were extracted, and quality assessment was conducted by two trained examiners. Qualitative synthesis was based on the recommendations of Fowkes and Fulton. Two meta-analyses were performed on studies investigating patients with: a) oral candidiasis and b) denture stomatitis. Out of 6034 screened studies, seven were eligible for qualitative and quantitative synthesis; of these, three evaluated oral candidiasis and four evaluated denture stomatitis. Qualitative synthesis showed that the main methodological problems of the studies included sample size, source of controls, matching, and randomization. Diabetic patients had a similar chance of developing oral candidiasis to non-diabetic patients (OR1.40 [0.96; 2.04], p = 0.08, I2 = 94%). However, diabetic patients had a higher chance to present denture stomatitis compared to non-diabetic patients (OR 1.92 [1.42, 2.59] p < 0.0001, I2 = 0%). Therefore, diabetic patients have a higher chance of developing denture stomatitis compared to non-diabetic patients. However, for all analyses, the certainty of the evidence was considered to be very low.
Topics: Candidiasis, Oral; Diabetes Mellitus; Humans; Stomatitis, Denture
PubMed: 32965459
DOI: 10.1590/1807-3107bor-2020.vol34.0113 -
Head & Face Medicine Nov 2020The Multiloop Edgewise Archwire (MEAW) appliance is an orthodontic treatment method suitable for the therapy of severe types of malocclusions such as open bites or... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
The Multiloop Edgewise Archwire (MEAW) appliance is an orthodontic treatment method suitable for the therapy of severe types of malocclusions such as open bites or anterior crossbites. The cephalometric Denture Frame Analysis (DFA) provides a supportive diagnostic tool for patient-specific treatment planning concerning the rearrangement of occlusion within the "denture frame". The objective of this study is to give a comprehensive overview of the national and international scientific literature about MEAW and DFA regarding the general therapeutic effects, advantages and limitations.
METHODS AND MATERIALS
A computerized literature search was performed using four principal medical databases (PubMed/Medline, Google Scholar, Web of Science and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials) and supplemented by manual searching of the references listed in the retrieved articles. The results were screened and assessed following the PRISMA guidelines.
RESULTS
Six hundred seventy-seven full articles were assessed for eligibility. A number of 134 articles went through qualitative analysis and 3 studies were finally involved in comparative synopsis. The findings reveal advantageous characteristics of the MEAW technique such as a high degree of three-dimensional individual tooth control and a comparatively low load deflection rate, causing mostly dentoalveolar changes without significantly influencing the skeletal structures.
CONCLUSION
Based on current literature, the MEAW technique appears to have several therapeutic benefits and serves as a sufficient alternative treatment method for dentoalveolar compensation, when measures of orthognathic surgery are rejected. Concerning the deficient data basis of available literature and the low level of scientific evidence, further studies are required in order to expand on the knowledge in this subject area. Several aspects like the effectiveness or the long-term stability have to be evaluated more extensively. Moreover, the transferability of the DFA to ethnic groups other than the Asian ethnicity should be examined further.
Topics: Cephalometry; Dentures; Humans; Malocclusion; Orthodontic Wires; Tooth Movement Techniques
PubMed: 33243257
DOI: 10.1186/s13005-020-00247-x -
Flexural Strength of CAD/CAM Denture Base Materials: Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Studies.Journal of International Society of... 2022Digital complete dentures fabrication techniques are expanding. This study aimed to review flexural strength (FS) of milled and 3D-printed denture base materials to... (Review)
Review
INTRODUCTION
Digital complete dentures fabrication techniques are expanding. This study aimed to review flexural strength (FS) of milled and 3D-printed denture base materials to answer the study question: is FS of computer-aided designing/computer-aided manufacturing (CAD/CAM) denture base comparable to conventional heat-polymerized materials?
MATERIALS AND METHODS
Search was done within different databases for articles published between January 2010 and June 2021 using specific keywords. Articles of studies in English language with methods following International Standards Organization standardization/ADA specifications for flexural testing of conventional and CAD/CAM (milled or printed) polymethyl methacrylate (PMMA) materials were included.
RESULTS
Out of the 61 studies, 9 were processed for data extraction and only 7 underwent meta-analysis. Two, six, and one study showed high, moderate, and low risk of bias, respectively. Random-effects model was used for analysis and resulted in the average FS of 120.61 MPa [95% confidence interval (CI): 109.81-131.41] and 92.16 MPa (CI: 75.12-109.19) for CAD/CAM milled and heat-polymerized PMMA, respectively.
CONCLUSION
Subtractive CAD/CAM technique of denture fabrication showed satisfactory FS values, whereas additive CAD/CAM method was comparable to conventional heat-polymerized technique with lower value, requiring further investigations and improvement. The clinical use of milled denture bases is an acceptable substitution to heat-polymerized PMMA, making the denture fabrication an easier and faster process.
PubMed: 35462750
DOI: 10.4103/jispcd.JISPCD_310_21 -
International Journal of Molecular... May 2022Amidst growing technological advancements, newer denture base materials and polymerization methods have been introduced. During fabrication, certain mechanical... (Review)
Review
Amidst growing technological advancements, newer denture base materials and polymerization methods have been introduced. During fabrication, certain mechanical properties are vital for the clinical longevity of the denture base. This systematic review aimed to explore the effect of newer denture base materials and/or polymerization methods on the mechanical properties of the denture base. An electronic database search of English peer-reviewed published papers was conducted using related keywords from 1 January 2011, up until 31 December 2021. This systematic review was based on guidelines proposed by the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA). The search identified 579 papers. However, the inclusion criteria recognized 22 papers for eligibility. The risk of bias was moderate in all studies except in two where it was observed as low. Heat cure polymethyl methacrylate (PMMA) and compression moulding using a water bath is still a widely used base material and polymerization technique, respectively. However, chemically modified PMMA using monomers, oligomers, copolymers and cross-linking agents may have a promising result. Although chemically modified PMMA resin might enhance the mechanical properties of denture base material, no clear inferences can be drawn about the superiority of any polymerization method other than the conventional compression moulding technique.
Topics: Denture Bases; Materials Testing; Polymerization; Polymers; Polymethyl Methacrylate
PubMed: 35628546
DOI: 10.3390/ijms23105737 -
The Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry Sep 2021Conventional techniques (CTs) for complete denture fabrication involve a series of clinical and laboratory steps. A simplification of this process has been advocated,... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
STATEMENT OF PROBLEM
Conventional techniques (CTs) for complete denture fabrication involve a series of clinical and laboratory steps. A simplification of this process has been advocated, but whether simplified techniques result in acceptable treatment outcomes is unclear.
PURPOSE
The purpose of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to evaluate the efficiency of simplified denture fabrication techniques in comparison with CTs.
MATERIAL AND METHODS
The standard methodological procedures prescribed by the Cochrane Collaboration for systematic review and meta-analysis were used. An electronic search (MEDLINE through PubMed, Cochrane trial registry, and Scopus) and a manual search up to February 2020 were made to identify studies. Only randomized controlled trials involving edentulous adults requiring complete denture treatment were included.
RESULTS
Nineteen studies met the inclusion criteria. The pooled estimate of the included studies for patient satisfaction at 6 months marginally favored the simplified method of denture fabrication (standardized mean difference=0.02 [95% confidence interval {CI} -0.22 to 0.27]). The pooled estimate of the included studies for clinical time and cost of fabrication favored the simplified method (mean difference=-77.34 [95% CI -122.45 to -32.24] and mean difference=-85.89 [95% CI -170.02 to -1.77] respectively).
CONCLUSIONS
Simplified techniques were cost effective and less time consuming than the CT, with no significant difference in patient satisfaction or oral health-related quality of life. The high risk of bias and heterogeneity among studies requires that the results be considered cautiously.
Topics: Adult; Denture, Complete; Efficiency; Humans; Mouth, Edentulous; Patient Satisfaction; Quality of Life
PubMed: 32891402
DOI: 10.1016/j.prosdent.2020.07.003