evidencegaps
Findings

What do systematic reviews say?

Refine by population, intervention, comparison or outcome
More filters
Evidence found and GRADE certainty

100 questions · 145 findings · 13 reviews · Dental caries

Sort:Best matchNewestHighest certaintyDownload CSV
No studies found 23 · 15.9%GRADE not reported 72 · 49.7%Very low 41 · 28.3%Low 5 · 3.4%Moderate 4 · 2.8%High 0 · 0%

Metal-free FDPs (zirconia ceramic) vs Metal-ceramic FDPs

Periodontal/peri-implant status (secondary outcomes) · Adults (18 years or older) needing a three-unit fixed dental prosthesis (FDP)

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. The trial registered pocket depth, bleeding on probing and mobility at follow-up visits but did not report the data.
    0 studies
    No studies found

Metal-free FDPs (zirconia ceramic) vs Metal-ceramic FDPs

Patient satisfaction (measured by patient satisfaction or aesthetic scales) · Adults (18 years or older) needing a three-unit fixed dental prosthesis (FDP)

It is very uncertain whether metal-free FDPs (zirconia ceramic) changes aesthetic evaluation (patient aesthetic satisfaction changes) compared with metal-ceramic FDPs (very low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Metal-free FDPs (lithium disilicate) vs Metal-ceramic FDPs

Bridge failure · Adults (18 years or older) needing a three-unit fixed dental prosthesis (FDP)

It is very uncertain whether metal-free FDPs (lithium disilicate) changes bridge failure compared with metal-ceramic FDPs (very low certainty).

2 findings from 1 review

Metal-free implant abutments (zirconia) vs Metal implant abutments (titanium)

Marginal bone level change · Adults (18 years or older) with one missing tooth in the aesthetic zone needing an implant-supported single crown

Metal-free implant abutments (zirconia) showed no clear difference in marginal bone level change (MBLC) compared with metal implant abutments (titanium); GRADE not reported.

2 findings from 1 review

Metal-free implant abutments (zirconia) vs Metal implant abutments (titanium)

Periodontal or peri-implant status: gingival recession (REC) · Adults (18 years or older) with one missing tooth in the aesthetic zone needing an implant-supported single crown

Metal-free implant abutments (zirconia) showed no clear difference in gingival/mucosal recession (REC) compared with metal implant abutments (titanium); GRADE not reported.

1 finding from 1 review

Metal-free implant abutments (zirconia) vs Metal implant abutments (titanium)

Abutment failure · 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 abutments (zirconia) changes abutment failure compared with metal implant abutments (titanium) (very low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Metal-free implant abutments (zirconia) vs Metal implant abutments (titanium)

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

Metal-free implant abutments (zirconia) showed no clear difference in implant probing pocket depth (PPD) compared with metal implant abutments (titanium); GRADE not reported.

1 finding from 1 review

Metal-free implant abutments (zirconia) vs Metal implant abutments (titanium)

Aesthetics · Adults (18 years or older) with one missing tooth in the aesthetic zone needing an implant-supported single crown
1 finding from 1 review
  • Metal‐free materials for fixed prosthodontic restorations 2017 · Cochrane All outcomes
    12 months
    Primary outcome aesthetic evaluation data were reported as the frequency of distribution of the Implant Crown Aesthetic Index (ICAI); no comparative summary estimate was presented.
    2 studies · 47 participants
    Very low

Metal-free single crowns (full-contour zirconia) vs Cast gold (conventional metal) single crowns

Crown failure · Adults (18 years or older) needing a single crown in the molar or premolar region

It is very uncertain whether metal-free single crowns (full-contour zirconia) changes crown failure compared with cast gold (conventional metal) single crowns (very low certainty).

2 findings from 1 review

Metal-free single crowns (full-contour zirconia) vs Cast gold (conventional metal) single crowns

Crown complications · Adults (18 years or older) needing a single crown in the molar or premolar region

It is very uncertain whether metal-free single crowns (full-contour zirconia) changes crown complications compared with cast gold (conventional metal) single crowns (very low certainty).

2 findings from 1 review

Metal-free single crowns (full-contour zirconia) vs Cast gold (conventional metal) single crowns

Periodontal/peri-implant status and occlusal wear (secondary outcomes) · Adults (18 years or older) needing a single crown in the molar or premolar region

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

1 finding from 1 review

Metal-free tooth-supported FDPs (pressed veneering ceramic) vs Metal-free tooth-supported FDPs (layered veneering ceramic)

Aesthetics · Adults (18 years or older) needing a three-unit tooth-supported fixed dental prosthesis
1 finding from 1 review
  • Metal‐free materials for fixed prosthodontic restorations 2017 · Cochrane All outcomes
    No comparative data were presented with regard to aesthetics. Aesthetics evaluated by the patient was reported dichotomously (yes/no) in the trial but no between-group estimate was presented.
    1 study
    GRADE not reported

Metal-free tooth-supported FDPs (pressed veneering ceramic) vs Metal-free tooth-supported FDPs (layered veneering ceramic)

Periodontal/peri-implant status (secondary outcomes) · Adults (18 years or older) needing a three-unit tooth-supported fixed dental prosthesis
1 finding from 1 review
  • Metal‐free materials for fixed prosthodontic restorations 2017 · Cochrane All outcomes
    No comparative data were presented for the pre-specified secondary outcomes. The trial analyzed and reported plaque index, bleeding on probing and pocket probing depth but no between-group estimate was presented in the…
    1 study
    GRADE not reported