Failure rate of single-unit restorations on posterior vital teeth: A systematic review

Afrashtehfar, Kelvin I.; Emami, Elham; Ahmadi, Motahareh; Eilayyan, Owis; Abi-Nader, Samer; Tamimi, Faleh

doi:10.1016/j.prosdent.2016.08.003

Cited by 38 publications

(66 citation statements)

References 60 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…, Afrashtehfar et al . ). This issue is relevant as prosthetic and restorative malpractice claims constitute the majority of litigations in dentistry (Schwarz , Rene & Owall , Hapcook , Kiani & Sheikhazadi , Lopez‐Nicolas et al .…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 97%

Failure of single‐unit restorations on root filled posterior teeth: a systematic review

et al. 2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Afrashtehfar KI, Ahmadi M, Emami E, Abi-Nader S, Tamimi F. Failure of single-unit restorations on root filled posterior teeth: a systematic review. International Endodontic Journal, 50, 951-966, 2017. This systematic review investigated the failure rate of conventional single-unit restorations in root filled posterior permanent teeth. Two reviewers independently applied eligibility criteria, extracted data and assessed the quality of the evidence of each included study according to the Cochrane Collaboration's procedures for randomized control trials (RCTs) and the STROBE criteria for observational studies. The MEDLINE (via Ovid), EMBASE (via Ovid), Cochrane Oral Health Group Trials Register and CENTRAL (via Cochrane Library) databases were searched electronically (January 1993 to week 1, February 2015). This was complemented by an additional hand search of selected journals and the references of relevant studies. Clinical studies published on root filled single-unit restorative treatments with a mean follow-up period of at least 3 years were selected. The outcome measured was clinical or radiological failure. Overall, the four RCTs and the single observational study included were of low and high quality, respectively. Therefore, a meta-analysis was not possible. The pooled mean failure rates were reported according to the type of treatment and remaining coronal tooth structure. The current evidence suggested that the failure rates of the treatments may depend on the amount of remaining tooth structure and type of treatment. Postretained crowns were associated with the most favourable outcome in teeth with one to two remaining coronal tooth wall(s), whereas post-free crowns were superior when greater tooth structure was available. Restorations in teeth without ferrules had such a high rate of failure that other treatment options should be considered.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 97%

Failure of single‐unit restorations on root filled posterior teeth: a systematic review

et al. 2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…One of the subitems of domain 11 of AMSTAR 2 considers if the author reported separate summary estimates for each study design. In our analysis, only the SR of Afrashtehfar et al took into account study design reporting separate estimates . Monsarrat et al reported that sensitivity analysis did not reveal differences between studies designs, however, did not report separate estimates .…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 97%

“…Fifteen SRs fulfilled the eligibility criteria . Eleven studies are from Aquino et al's study and four from the update.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The characteristics of the studies are presented in Table . Table presents the AMSTAR 2 results of 15 included SRs considering that 12 of the corresponding authors returned our email . Among them, one sent a document available only in German with information about the SR and it was impossible to evaluate due language restrictions of our team …”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Table features the 15 SRs evaluating clinical performance of direct composite resin restoration in permanent posterior teeth or comparing direct composite resin with other material/techniques| Considering the inclusion criteria used, most SRs (11/15) included only prospective studies; among them, six included only randomized controlled trials (RCTs), four included RCTs and nonrandomized controlled trials and one included RCTs, nonrandomized controlled trials and prospective observational studies without comparison group (case series), which may lead to a certain degree of limited results, and only three studies included observational studies with longer follow‐up times . Eight SRs included more than one study design; among them, seven performed a type of meta‐analysis . One of the subitems of domain 11 of AMSTAR 2 considers if the author reported separate summary estimates for each study design.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Systematic reviews in restorative dentistry: discussing relevant aspects

Sarkis‐Onofre

Pereira‐Cenci

Tricco

et al. 2019

J Esthet Restor Dent

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective This article aims to discuss key aspects of systematic reviews (SR) focusing on the improvement of the conduct and reporting. Methods Important aspects of SRs, such as prospective registration of the review protocol, basic structure, inclusion criteria, use of the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta‐Analyses (PRISMA) Statement, confidence in the results and future directions are discussed. To determine relevant aspects, a search was conducted without date limitations in PubMed (October 15th, 2017) to identify SRs written in English evaluating clinical performance of direct composite resin restoration in permanent posterior teeth or comparing direct composite resin with other material/techniques. The quality of SRs included was assessed using the Assessing the Methodological Quality of Systematic Reviews 2 tool. Results Fifteen SRs were included. The overall confidence in the results of SRs was classified as critically low. Some aspects should be highlighted: SRs of in vitro studies are an important tool in restorative dentistry, and initiatives such as the PRISMA Statement and PROSPERO should be considered a standard code of practice. Conclusions The compliance with and awareness of the discussed aspects may be a significant feature of the improvement of SR quality in the dentistry. Clinical significance Initiatives such as the PRISMA Statement and PROSPERO should be taken in account by systematic reviewers in dentistry to improve the conduct and reporting of SRs, and to make their reviews are more clinically helpful.

show abstract

Dentists' decisions regarding the need for cuspal coverage for endodontically treated and vital posterior teeth

Abu-Awwad

2019

Clinical & Exp Dental Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objectives Deciding when cuspal coverage is needed for posterior teeth is considered a challenge for dentists. The aims were to assess dentists' decision making regarding the need for cuspal coverage for vital teeth (VT) and endodontically treated teeth (ETT) with varying amounts of tooth structure loss and to identify clinical situations of dissimilarity and uncertainty in decision making. Materials and Methods A random sample of 182 dentists were invited to participate in the survey. The survey included photos of 13 posterior teeth: six VT and seven ETT. The clinical situations selected were based on a hypothetical scale of typodont teeth with ascending amounts of tooth structure loss. A brief description of each situation was provided. Each dentist was asked to decide whether cuspal coverage is needed, not needed, or unsure. Descriptive analyses using SPSS were conducted. Seventy‐five percent was chosen as a cutoff point for assessing similarity in decision making. The unsure answer reflected uncertainty. Associations were assessed using chi‐square test. Results One hundred twenty dentists participated (65.9% response rate, 70 females). Median for years of experience was 3.5 (interquartile range 1.1–10.8). Analyses revealed a similarity percentage of <75% in decision making among dentists for six clinical situations: four VT and two ETT. More similarity was observed for situations at both ends of the scale with minimal and severe amounts of tooth structure loss and more for ETT than for VT. The highest percentages of uncertainty were more for VT than for ETT. Clinical conditions of VT were more likely to receive the “not sure” decision compared with those of ETT ( χ 2 , P < .001). No association was detected with gender ( χ 2 , P = .509) or years of experience ( χ 2 , P = .223). Conclusions Dissimilarity and uncertainty in deciding when cuspal coverage is needed were observed especially for VT and teeth with a moderate amount of structure loss.

show abstract

Failure rate of single-unit restorations on posterior vital teeth: A systematic review

Cited by 38 publications

References 60 publications

Failure of single‐unit restorations on root filled posterior teeth: a systematic review

Failure of single‐unit restorations on root filled posterior teeth: a systematic review

Systematic reviews in restorative dentistry: discussing relevant aspects

Dentists' decisions regarding the need for cuspal coverage for endodontically treated and vital posterior teeth

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About