Hardan Louis, Mancino Davide, Bourgi Rim, Cuevas-Suárez Carlos Enrique, Lukomska-Szymanska Monika, Zarow Maciej, Jakubowicz Natalia, Zamarripa-Calderón Juan Eliezer, Kafa Laura, Etienne Olivier, Reitzer François, Kharouf Naji, Haïkel Youssef
Department of Restorative Dentistry, School of Dentistry, Saint-Joseph University, Beirut 11072180, Lebanon.
Department of Biomaterials and Bioengineering, INSERM UMR_S 1121, Biomaterials and Bioengineering, 67000 Strasbourg, France.
Bioengineering (Basel). 2022 Jul 27;9(8):346. doi: 10.3390/bioengineering9080346.
Tooth wear is considered a well-developed issue in daily clinical practice; however, there is no standard protocol for treatment. The aim of this manuscript was to systematically review the literature to evaluate the clinical outcomes of direct or indirect restorations for treating tooth wear. A literature search was conducted through the PubMed MedLine, Scopus, ISI Web of Science, Scielo, and EMBASE databases up to 29 April 2022. Clinical studies evaluating the clinical performance of direct or indirect restorations for treating tooth wear for a minimum follow-up of 6 months were included in the review. A total of 2776 records were obtained from the search databases. After full-text reading, 16 studies were included in the qualitative analysis. Considering the high heterogenicity of the studies included, a meta-analysis could not be performed. All studies included the rehabilitation of anterior and posterior teeth with extensive wear, using both indirect and direct restorations for a maximum follow-up of 10 years. Restoration materials included ceramo-metal crowns, full gold crowns, lithium disilicate ceramic, zirconia, polymer infiltrated ceramic networks, and resin composites. Most of the reports assessed the survival rate of the restorations and the clinical features using the United States Public Health Service (USPHS) Evaluation System criteria. Contradictory discoveries were perceived concerning the type of restoration with better clinical performance. Considering the current literature available, there is no evidence in the superiority of any restoration technique to ensure the highest clinical performance for treating tooth wear.
在日常临床实践中,牙齿磨损被认为是一个已充分研究的问题;然而,目前尚无标准的治疗方案。本手稿的目的是系统回顾文献,以评估直接或间接修复治疗牙齿磨损的临床效果。通过PubMed MedLine、Scopus、ISI Web of Science、Scielo和EMBASE数据库进行文献检索,检索截至2022年4月29日的文献。纳入本综述的临床研究需评估直接或间接修复治疗牙齿磨损的临床表现,且最短随访时间为6个月。从检索数据库中总共获得了2776条记录。经过全文阅读,16项研究被纳入定性分析。考虑到纳入研究的高度异质性,无法进行荟萃分析。所有研究均包括对前后牙广泛磨损的修复,采用间接和直接修复方式,最长随访时间为10年。修复材料包括烤瓷熔附金属冠、全金冠、二硅酸锂陶瓷、氧化锆、聚合物渗透陶瓷网络和树脂复合材料。大多数报告使用美国公共卫生服务(USPHS)评估系统标准评估修复体的生存率和临床特征。关于哪种修复类型具有更好的临床性能,存在相互矛盾的发现。鉴于现有文献,没有证据表明任何一种修复技术在治疗牙齿磨损方面具有确保最高临床性能的优越性。