Systematic review of ceramic inlays

Abstract

The purpose of the present study was to conduct a systematic review of ceramic inlays, assess the quality of published clinical studies, and determine the clinical effectiveness of ceramic inlays compared to other forms of posterior restorations. Prospective clinical trials of ceramic inlays published from 1990 to 2001 were retrieved by electronic and hand searching. The methodological quality of each study was assessed by two calibrated reviewers using a standardised checklist. The clinical effectiveness of ceramic inlays was evaluated in terms of failure rate, postoperative pain, and aesthetics. The results were compared to those of other forms of posterior restorations by means of an odds ratio. Among 46 articles selected for quality assessment, only five (10.6%) reported randomised controlled trials and 15 (32.6%) presented controlled clinical trials. The remaining 26 papers (56.5%) were longitudinal clinical trials lacking control groups. Only three papers fulfilled the requirement for statistical analysis to evaluate the clinical effectiveness of ceramic inlays. The results indicate no significant differences in longevity or postoperative sensitivity between ceramic and other posterior restorations over assessment periods of up to 1 year. It is concluded that no strong evidence is available to confirm the clinical effectiveness of ceramic inlays in comparison to other posterior restorations. Greater attention is required to the design and reporting of studies to improve the quality of clinical trials of ceramic inlays.