Khorasani Erfan, Mokhlesi Aida, Arzani Sarah, Ghodsi Safoura, Mosaddad Seyed Ali
Student Research Committee, Qazvin University of Medical Sciences, Qazvin, Iran; USERN Office, Qazvin University of Medical Sciences, Qazvin, Iran.
Student Research Committee, Qazvin University of Medical Sciences, Qazvin, Iran; USERN Office, Qazvin University of Medical Sciences, Qazvin, Iran; Social Determinants of Health Research Center, Research Institute for Prevention of Non-Communicable Diseases, Qazvin University of Medical Sciences, Qazvin, Iran.
Int Dent J. 2025 Apr;75(2):464-473. doi: 10.1016/j.identj.2024.11.007. Epub 2024 Dec 12.
Limited studies assess clinical key factors in the success of digitally fabricated complete dentures between additive and subtractive methods. This study aimed to compare 2 determinants of clinical success-retention and patient satisfaction- in complete dentures fabricated using additive and subtractive approaches. PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, Embase, Cochrane Library, and Google Scholar were searched up to August 2024. Records were screened by title, abstract, and full text against the eligibility criteria. The standardized mean difference (SMD) was calculated using the data extracted from each included study. A random effects model pooled the effect sizes, and heterogeneity was assessed with Cochran's Q test, I-squared, and Tau-squared indices; publication bias was evaluated using Begg's funnel plot and the Egger test, while sensitivity analyses checked result robustness. The risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane RoB 2 and ROBINS-I tools. Of the initial 1098 records, a total of 4 articles were deemed eligible. Although mean denture retention was higher in the additive compared to the subtractive method, the difference was not statistically significant (SMD = 0.165 N, 95% CI = [-0.176, 0.506], P = .343, I² = 58.72%). Similarly, mean satisfaction was lower in the additive compared to the subtractive method, but this difference was not statistically significant (SMD = -0.595, 95% CI = [-1.579, 0.389], P = .236, I² = 85.94%). Considering the high heterogeneity and the small number of studies, it can be cautiously concluded that there is no significant difference between complete dentures fabricated by 3D printing and milling approaches.
有限的研究评估了增材制造和减材制造方法在数字化制作全口义齿成功方面的临床关键因素。本研究旨在比较采用增材制造和减材制造方法制作的全口义齿临床成功的两个决定因素——固位和患者满意度。检索了截至2024年8月的PubMed、Scopus、Web of Science、Embase、Cochrane图书馆和谷歌学术。根据纳入标准，通过标题、摘要和全文对记录进行筛选。使用从每项纳入研究中提取的数据计算标准化平均差（SMD）。采用随机效应模型汇总效应量，并用Cochran's Q检验、I²和Tau²指数评估异质性；使用Begg漏斗图和Egger检验评估发表偏倚，同时进行敏感性分析以检验结果的稳健性。使用Cochrane RoB 2和ROBINS-I工具评估偏倚风险。在最初的1098条记录中，共有4篇文章被认为符合要求。尽管与减材制造方法相比，增材制造的义齿平均固位力更高，但差异无统计学意义（SMD = 0.165 N，95% CI = [-0.176, 0.506]，P = 0.343，I² = 58.72%）。同样，与减材制造方法相比，增材制造的平均满意度较低，但这种差异也无统计学意义（SMD = -0.595，95% CI = [-1.579, 0.389]，P = 0.236，I² = 85.94%）。考虑到高度的异质性和研究数量较少，可以谨慎地得出结论，3D打印和铣削方法制作的全口义齿之间没有显著差异。
