Longevity of direct and indirect resin composite restorations in permanent posterior teeth: A systematic review and meta-analysis
- PMID: 27523636
- DOI: 10.1016/j.jdent.2016.08.003
Longevity of direct and indirect resin composite restorations in permanent posterior teeth: A systematic review and meta-analysis
Abstract
Objectives: The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to assess the differences in clinical performance in direct and indirect resin composite restorations in permanent posterior teeth.
Sources: PubMed, the Cochrane Library, Web of Science, Scopus, LILACS, BBO, ClinicalTrials.gov and SiGLE were searched without restrictions.
Study selection: We included randomized clinical trials (RCTs) that compared the clinical performance of direct and indirect resin composite restorations in Class I and Class II cavities in permanent teeth, with at least two years of follow-up. The risk of bias tool suggested by Cochrane Collaboration was used for quality assessment.
Data: After duplicate removal, 912 studies were identified. Twenty fulfilled the inclusion criteria after the abstract screening. Two articles were added after a hand search of the reference list of included studies. After examination, nine RCTs were included in the qualitative analysis and five were considered to have a 'low' risk of bias. The overall risk difference in longevity between direct and indirect resin composite restorations in permanent posterior teeth (p>0.05) at five-year follow-up was 1.494 [0.893-2.500], and regardless of the type of tooth restored, that of molar and premolars was 0.716 [0.177-2.888] at three-year follow-up.
Conclusions: Based on the findings, there was no difference in longevity of direct and indirect resin composite restorations regardless of the type of material and the restored tooth.
Clinical significance: Contemporary dentistry is based on minimally invasive restorations. Any indication of a less conservative technique must have unquestionable advantages. In vitro and in vivo studies reveal contradictory evidence of the clinical performance of direct and indirect resin composite restorations in posterior teeth. Thus this study clarified this doubt.
Keywords: Direct composite; Inlay; Longevity; Meta-analysis; Resin composite restoration; Systematic review.
Copyright © 2016 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
Comment in
-
No evidence of indirect resin composite restorations lasting longer than direct resin composite restorations in posterior teeth.J Am Dent Assoc. 2017 Apr;148(4):e17. doi: 10.1016/j.adaj.2016.12.016. Epub 2017 Feb 14. J Am Dent Assoc. 2017. PMID: 28213983 No abstract available.
-
Limited Evidence Suggests There Is No Difference Between the Clinical Longevity of direct vs Indirect Composite Resins in Class I and II Cavities.J Evid Based Dent Pract. 2017 Jun;17(2):110-112. doi: 10.1016/j.jebdp.2017.03.012. Epub 2017 Apr 4. J Evid Based Dent Pract. 2017. PMID: 28501055
-
No differences in longevity of direct and indirect composite restorations.Evid Based Dent. 2017 Jun 23;18(2):46. doi: 10.1038/sj.ebd.6401237. Evid Based Dent. 2017. PMID: 28642558
Publication types
MeSH terms
Substances
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Other Literature Sources
Medical