Early clinical performance of resin cements in glass-ceramic posterior restorations in adult vital teeth: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Dentists must regularly determine the best adhesive cementation protocol for glass-ceramic restorations on posterior teeth. The authors are aware of few in vivo follow-up studies and no meta-analyses, including clinical trials, regarding this clinically relevant topic, which merits further investigation. The purpose of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to statistically analyze the clinical performance of glass-ceramic posterior restorations by using a descriptive synthesis based on the integrity of the tooth and restoration under different cementation protocols for self-adhesive or conventional resin cements. The electronic databases Cochrane, LILACS, PubMed/MEDLINE, SciELO, Scopus, and Web of Science were used to identify relevant clinical trials. Non–peer-reviewed literature searches and hand searching were performed to find additional references. Language, participant's age, or time restrictions were not set. Restoration and tooth integrity were the 2 aspects considered for the meta-analysis. Statistical analyses were performed using a software program in which fixed or random effect models with risk ratios and 95% confidence intervals were applied. Three prospective randomized or quasirandomized clinical trials, published in English from 2012 onward, were selected and statistically analyzed. The integrity of the tooth and restoration was assessed at the baseline and 1 year after the restorative intervention. The statistical analyses did not show any significant differences between the intervention and control groups in terms of the integrity of the tooth and restoration. This meta-analysis indicated no clinical differences in the ceramic cementation using a self-adhesive or conventional resin cement after the 1-year follow-up period because both resin cements showed adequate properties for tooth and restoration integrity.