|
The Cochrane Collaboration
Cochrane Reviews |
| Explore | New + Updated | Other languages |
|
 |
Ceramic inlays for restoring posterior teethHayashi M, Yeung A
Bookmark this:
     more ...
SummaryCeramic inlays for restoring posterior teethMore research is needed to determine whether tooth-coloured ceramic inlays compare well over the long term with amalgam, resin or gold inlays.
This is a Cochrane review abstract and plain language summary, prepared and maintained by The Cochrane Collaboration, currently published in The Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2009 Issue 4, Copyright © 2009 The Cochrane Collaboration. Published by John Wiley and Sons, Ltd.. The full text of the review is available in The Cochrane Library (ISSN 1464-780X).
This version first published online:
January 20. 2003 AbstractBackgroundIn recent decades ceramic inlays have been used with the increasing requirements from patients for tooth-coloured restorations in posterior teeth. Ceramic inlays can offer an excellent appearance, however, their long-term prognosis is uncertain, as only a few studies have reported the long-term clinical performance of these restorations. ObjectivesTo compare the effectiveness of ceramic inlays in posterior teeth with other posterior restorations. Search strategyWe conducted an electronic search of the Cochrane Oral Health Group Trials Register, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (The Cochrane Library 2002, Issue 1), MEDLINE and EMBASE from 1990 to 2001. Handsearching included relevant journals and bibliographies of all relevant papers and review articles from 1990 up to 2001. In addition, we contacted experts and companies conducting clinical research on ceramic restorations to find other trials or unpublished materials or to clarify ambiguous or missing data. Selection criteriaRandomised controlled trials, in which the longevity of ceramic inlays is compared with those of other posterior restorations. Data collection and analysisScreening of possible studies and data extraction were independently conducted by two review authors using a specially designed chart. Authors of studies were contacted for additional information. The methodological quality of studies was assessed in duplicate using individual components. The Cochrane Collaboration statistical guidelines were followed and the results expressed as odds ratio (OR) and 95% confidence interval for dichotomous outcomes. Main resultsTwo studies fulfilled the criteria to be included in the review. However, one of them was later excluded from the review, as the study design was not clearly described. The remaining included study evaluated the clinical performance of 60 ceramic inlays and 20 gold inlays for 5 years. Seven of the 60 ceramic inlays and two of the 20 gold inlays failed at 5-year review. No ceramic inlays resulted in postoperative pain/discomfort after the treatment, however, one gold inlay did. The power of the included study was not great enough to detect an important difference in longevity and postoperative pain/discomfort between ceramic and gold inlays. Authors' conclusionsThere is no strong evidence available to support any differences in the clinical performance of ceramic inlays and other posterior restorations. There is a limited number of well-designed clinical trials within this research area. Greater attention to the design and reporting of studies should be given to improve the study quality of ceramic restoration trials. |