Findings

What do systematic reviews say?

164 questions · 173 findings · 17 reviews · All outcomes

Sort:Best matchNewest Highest certainty Download CSV

No studies found 28 · 16.2%GRADE not reported 115 · 66.5%Very low 30 · 17.3%Low 0 · 0%Moderate 0 · 0%High 0 · 0%

Metal-free implant-supported single crowns (zirconia veneered with feldspathic ceramic) vs Metal-ceramic implant-supported single crowns

Implant crown complications · Adults (18 years or older) with one missing tooth in the aesthetic zone needing an implant-supported single crown

It is very uncertain whether metal-free implant-supported single crowns (zirconia veneered with… changes implant crown complications compared with metal-ceramic implant-supported single crowns (very low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Metal‐free materials for fixed prosthodontic restorations 2017 · Cochrane All outcomes
24 months
OR 6.33 [0.26, 152.86]
1 study · 18 participants
Very low

Ceramic inlays (all types) vs Composite resin inlay

Outcome not reported · Adults who require restorative treatment in posterior teeth

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

1 finding from 1 review

Ceramic inlays for restoring posterior teeth 2003 · Cochrane All outcomes
One randomised controlled trial (Gladys 1995) compared ceramic and resin composite inlays over 3 years, but it was excluded because the study design (parallel-group or split-mouth) was not clearly described; no…
0 studies
No studies found

Ceramic inlays (all types) vs Amalgam

Outcome not reported · Adults who require restorative treatment in posterior teeth

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

1 finding from 1 review

Ceramic inlays for restoring posterior teeth 2003 · Cochrane All outcomes
No eligible randomised controlled trial comparing ceramic inlays with amalgam restorations was identified; this planned comparison could not be evaluated.
0 studies
No studies found

Ceramic inlays (all types) vs Gold inlay

Aesthetic satisfaction (colour match) · Adults who require restorative treatment in posterior teeth

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

1 finding from 1 review

Ceramic inlays for restoring posterior teeth 2003 · Cochrane All outcomes
Information on aesthetic satisfaction could not be obtained from this study as it did not use the tooth-coloured restorations as the control group.
0 studies
No studies found

Ceramic inlays (all types) vs Gold inlay

Postoperative sensitivity · Adults who require restorative treatment in posterior teeth

1 finding from 1 review

Ceramic inlays for restoring posterior teeth 2003 · Cochrane All outcomes
1 week
Postoperative sensitivity was evaluated 1 week after placement. No teeth with ceramic inlays were found to have postoperative sensitivity, while one tooth with gold inlay presented sensitivity, which lasted more than 2…
1 study · 20 participants
GRADE not reported

Ceramic inlays (all types) vs Gold inlay

Failure rate (longevity) at 5 years · Adults who require restorative treatment in posterior teeth

Ceramic inlays (all types) showed no clear difference in failure rate (longevity) at 5 years compared with gold inlay; GRADE not reported.

1 finding from 1 review

Ceramic inlays for restoring posterior teeth 2003 · Cochrane All outcomes
5 years
OR 1.12 [0.08, 15.0]
1 study · 20 participants
GRADE not reported

Ceramic inlays (all types) vs Composite resin (direct restoration)

Outcome not reported · Adults who require restorative treatment in posterior teeth

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

1 finding from 1 review

Ceramic inlays for restoring posterior teeth 2003 · Cochrane All outcomes
No eligible randomised controlled trial comparing ceramic inlays with composite resin (direct) restorations was identified; this planned comparison could not be evaluated.
0 studies
No studies found

Ceramic implant abutment vs Metal implant abutments (titanium)

Overall success rate · Patients receiving implant-supported single crowns / short-span FDPs

1 finding from 1 review

Interventions for replacing missing teeth: partially absent dentition 2012 · Cochrane All outcomes
Andersson 2003: 94% (16/17) ceramic vs 100% (12/12) titanium; Andersson 2001: 93% (28/30) ceramic vs 100% (35/35) titanium; no statistical analysis provided; no measurable / non-significant differences in alveolar bone…
2 studies · 107 participants
GRADE not reported

Titanium (Procera) abutment vs Gold-alloy (machined UCLA) abutment

Success / prosthetic complications (4 years) · Patients with single-tooth implant crowns; split-mouth, 4-year

1 finding from 1 review

Interventions for replacing missing teeth: partially absent dentition 2012 · Cochrane All outcomes
4 years
100% success, no prosthetic complications, and a similar loss of marginal bone (0.4 mm) in both groups (narrative)
1 study · 20 participants
GRADE not reported

Ceramic restoration material vs Porcelain-fused-to-metal restoration material

Pulp necrosis · Vital teeth

The pooled incidence with ceramic restorations was 5.59%.

1 finding from 1 review

Incidence and influential factors in pulp necrosis and periapical pathosis following indirect restorations: a… 2023 All outcomes
Ceramic
Proportion 5.59 [2.89, 9.12]
460 participants
GRADE not reported

Single full-coverage metal-ceramic crown over composite core and post vs Direct adhesive composite restoration with post (conventional filling, no crown)

Cost of the intervention · People with a permanent tooth that has undergone endodontic (root canal) treatment

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

1 finding from 1 review

Single crowns versus conventional fillings for the restoration of root‐filled teeth 2015 · Cochrane All outcomes
No data were reported nor measured by the study. The abstract confirms no evidence was available for any secondary outcome.
Studies not reported
No studies found

Single full-coverage metal-ceramic crown over composite core and post vs Direct adhesive composite restoration with post (conventional filling, no crown)

Patient satisfaction / quality of life (validated measure) · People with a permanent tooth that has undergone endodontic (root canal) treatment

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

1 finding from 1 review

Single crowns versus conventional fillings for the restoration of root‐filled teeth 2015 · Cochrane All outcomes
This outcome was not reported nor measured by the study. The abstract confirms no evidence was available for any secondary outcome.
Studies not reported
No studies found

Single full-coverage metal-ceramic crown over composite core and post vs Direct adhesive composite restoration with post (conventional filling, no crown)

Catastrophic failure of the restored tooth or restoration leading directly to extraction · People with a permanent tooth that has undergone endodontic (root canal) treatment

1 finding from 1 review

Single crowns versus conventional fillings for the restoration of root‐filled teeth 2015 · Cochrane All outcomes
3 years
SoF 'Catastrophic failure of restoration': assumed risk (conventional filling) 0, corresponding risk (single crown) 0; no events in either group so a relative effect was not estimable; 117 participants (1 study); GRADE…
1 study · 117 participants
Very low

Single full-coverage metal-ceramic crown over composite core and post vs Direct adhesive composite restoration with post (conventional filling, no crown)

Periodontal health status · People with a permanent tooth that has undergone endodontic (root canal) treatment

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

1 finding from 1 review

Single crowns versus conventional fillings for the restoration of root‐filled teeth 2015 · Cochrane All outcomes
No data were reported nor measured by the study. The abstract confirms no evidence was available for any secondary outcome.
Studies not reported
No studies found

Single full-coverage metal-ceramic crown over composite core and post vs Direct adhesive composite restoration with post (conventional filling, no crown)

Non-catastrophic failure of the post · People with a permanent tooth that has undergone endodontic (root canal) treatment

It is very uncertain whether single full-coverage metal-ceramic crown over composite core and post changes non-catastrophic failure of the post compared with direct adhesive composite restoration with post (conventional… (very low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Single crowns versus conventional fillings for the restoration of root‐filled teeth 2015 · Cochrane All outcomes
3 years
RR 1.96 [0.18, 21.01]
1 study · 117 participants
Very low

Single full-coverage metal-ceramic crown over composite core and post vs Direct adhesive composite restoration with post (conventional filling, no crown)

Incidence or recurrence of caries (assessed clinically or by radiographs) · People with a permanent tooth that has undergone endodontic (root canal) treatment

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

1 finding from 1 review

Single crowns versus conventional fillings for the restoration of root‐filled teeth 2015 · Cochrane All outcomes
No data were reported nor measured by the study. The abstract confirms no evidence was available for any secondary outcome.
Studies not reported
No studies found

Single full-coverage metal-ceramic crown over composite core and post vs Direct adhesive composite restoration with post (conventional filling, no crown)

Non-catastrophic failure of the restoration (requiring further treatment) · People with a permanent tooth that has undergone endodontic (root canal) treatment

It is very uncertain whether single full-coverage metal-ceramic crown over composite core and post changes non-catastrophic failure of the restoration (requiring further… compared with direct adhesive composite restoration with post (conventional… (very low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Single crowns versus conventional fillings for the restoration of root‐filled teeth 2015 · Cochrane All outcomes
3 years
RR 0.33 [0.04, 3.05]
1 study · 117 participants
Very low

Inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) vs Healthy controls without IBD

Periodontal disease (periodontitis) coincidence · Patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) and controls without IBD; mostly adults (one pediatric study), both sexes

Patients with IBD have about 2.5-fold higher odds of coexisting periodontal disease than healthy controls (pooled OR 2.49, 95% CI 1.97-3.15; 6 studies; not GRADE-rated).

1 finding from 1 review

Oral Health Status in Patients with Inflammatory Bowel Diseases: A Systematic Review. 2021 All outcomes
Hospital/clinic-based case-control and cross-sectional studies in 11 countries; 15 studies total (1748 participants: 1104 Crohn's disease, 534 ulcerative colitis, 110 IBD-form unspecified); 6 studies pooled for this analysis
OR 2.49 [1.97, 3.15]
6 studies
GRADE not reported

Alternative alloy FDP (e.g., Ceramalloy II / base-metal / palladium-silver) vs High-gold content control alloy FDP (Olympia)

Laboratory cost per unit · Patients receiving crowns and FDPs; split-mouth, 10-year

1 finding from 1 review

Interventions for replacing missing teeth: partially absent dentition 2012 · Cochrane All outcomes
10 years
Gold costs significantly higher: USD 89 per unit for gold compared to USD 53 for palladium-silver alloy and USD 37 for base-metal alloy
1 study
GRADE not reported

Metal-free implant-supported FDPs (zirconia-toughened alumina; In-Ceram Zirconia) vs Metal-free implant-supported FDPs (yttria-stabilized tetragonal zirconia; Denzir)

Periodontal/peri-implant status (secondary outcomes) · Adults (18 years or older) needing an implant-supported fixed dental prosthesis in the posterior region

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

1 finding from 1 review

Metal‐free materials for fixed prosthodontic restorations 2017 · Cochrane All outcomes
No data were presented for any of the pre-specified secondary outcomes. Follow-up visits registered pocket depth, bleeding on probing and mobility but the data were not reported.
0 studies
No studies found