Dongarwar Rashmi A, Kalaskar Ritesh R, Pipare Sandeep R, Sawant Shivani, Chandanakunnummal Anija
Department of Pediatric and Preventive Dentistry, Government Dental College and Hospital, Nagpur, India. Phone: +91 9860814910, e-mail:
Department of Pediatric and Preventive Dentistry, Government Dental College and Hospital, Nagpur, India.
J Contemp Dent Pract. 2025 Jan 1;26(1):93-102. doi: 10.5005/jp-journals-10024-3817.
To assess and evaluate the clinical performance of strip crowns and zirconia crowns as full coverage restorations in children aged 2-6 years, with a focus on gingival health, retention, and recurrent caries.
The current systematic review was drafted by following the recommendations of the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-analysis (PRISMA) checklist. Major electronic databases such as PubMed, PubMed Central, Cochrane Library, EMBASE, Scopus, ScienceDirect, Web of Science, ProQuest, registers, or gray literature and other reports such as websites, organizations, citations, etc., were thoroughly searched to find publications from 1995 up to January 2024. Following the population, intervention, comparison, and outcome (PICO) guideline: (i) Population: maxillary primary anterior teeth in 2-6-year-old children, (ii) Intervention: Zirconia crowns, (iii) Comparison: Strip crown, (iv) Outcome: plaque accumulation, gingival bleeding, recurrent caries, and crown retention were considered. Randomized clinical trial published in English comparing zirconia crowns and strip crowns among 2-6-year-old children are included.
Out of 446 studies initially identified, 441 were excluded due to duplication, non-English language, or not meeting inclusion criteria. Five studies that met the necessary criteria for quantitative and qualitative analysis were included. Zirconia crowns showed lower gingival bleeding, better retention, and no secondary caries compared to strip crowns at 3, 6, and 12 months, with minimal publication bias. However, the differences were not statistically significant.
Zirconia crowns demonstrate reduced gingival bleeding, superior retention, and an absence of secondary caries over 6, 9, and 12 months in maxillary primary anterior teeth among children aged 2-6 years.
In children aged 2-6 years, zirconia crowns are highly suitable for long-term restorations due to their superior durability, esthetics, and ability to enhance patient satisfaction. They are ideal for cases where functional and esthetic outcomes are priorities. Conversely, strip crowns serve as a practical option for temporary or intermediate restorations, offering a less invasive and cost-effective solution for managing primary teeth until definitive treatment is required. How to cite this article: Dongarwar RA, Kalaskar RR, Pipare SR, Clinical Performance of Strip vs Zirconia Crowns in 2-6-year-old: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis. J Contemp Dent Pract 2025;26(1):93-102.
评估和评价预成冠和氧化锆全冠作为2至6岁儿童全冠修复体的临床性能，重点关注牙龈健康、固位和继发龋。
本系统评价按照系统评价和Meta分析的首选报告项目（PRISMA）清单的建议起草。全面检索了主要电子数据库，如PubMed、PubMed Central、Cochrane图书馆、EMBASE、Scopus、ScienceDirect、Web of Science、ProQuest、注册库或灰色文献以及其他报告，如网站、组织、引文等，以查找1995年至2024年1月的出版物。遵循人群、干预、对照和结局（PICO）指南：（i）人群：2至6岁儿童的上颌乳前牙，（ii）干预：氧化锆全冠，（iii）对照：预成冠，（iv）结局：考虑菌斑积聚、牙龈出血、继发龋和冠固位情况。纳入发表于英文的、比较2至6岁儿童氧化锆全冠和预成冠的随机临床试验。
在最初识别的446项研究中，441项因重复、非英文或不符合纳入标准而被排除。纳入了5项符合定量和定性分析必要标准的研究。在3个月、6个月和12个月时，与预成冠相比，氧化锆全冠牙龈出血较少、固位更好且无继发龋，发表偏倚最小。然而，差异无统计学意义。
氧化锆全冠在2至6岁儿童上颌乳前牙中，在6个月、9个月和12个月时牙龈出血减少、固位更佳且无继发龋。
在2至6岁儿童中，氧化锆全冠因其卓越的耐久性、美观性和提高患者满意度的能力，非常适合长期修复。对于功能和美观结果优先的病例，它们是理想选择。相反，预成冠是临时或过渡性修复的实用选择，为乳牙管理提供了侵入性较小且经济高效的解决方案，直至需要确定性治疗。如何引用本文：Dongarwar RA, Kalaskar RR, Pipare SR, 2至6岁儿童预成冠与氧化锆全冠的临床性能：一项系统评价和Meta分析。《当代牙科实践杂志》2025；2(1):93 - 102。
Zotero 插件