Which surface treatment promotes higher bond strength for the repair of resin nanoceramics and polymer-infiltrated ceramics? A systematic review and meta-analysis.

STATEMENT OF PROBLEM: Which surface treatment provides the optimal bond strength (BS) for the repair of resin nanoceramics (RNCs) and polymer-infiltrated ceramics (PICs) is unclear. PURPOSE: The purpose of this systematic review and meta-analysis of in vitro studies was to determine the best surface treatment protocols for the repair of PICs and RNCs. MATERIAL AND METHODS: The PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science electronic databases were searched to select in vitro studies in English up to March 2020. Studies with fewer than 5 specimens, those that did not evaluate the BS of PICs or RNCs, and those with aging for fewer than 30 days and 5000 cycles were excluded. Data sets were extracted, and the mean differences were analyzed by using a systematic review software program. RESULTS: Among 284 potentially eligible studies, 21 were selected for full-text analysis, and 9 were included in the systematic review, of which 6 were used in the meta-analysis. The meta-analyses were performed for each treatment surface versus their respective control group and their combinations according to material: RNCs and PICs. For RNCs, airborne-particle abrasion with aluminum oxide (Al2O3) treatment was statistically higher than tribochemical silica airborne-particle abrasion (CoJet) (P=.02, I2=90%) and that in the hydrofluoric acid (HF) (P<.001, I2=0%) groups and was statistically similar to diamond rotary instrument grinding (P=.40, I2=54%). For PICs, the treatment with hydrofluoric acid (HF) was statistically significantly higher than with CoJet (P=.03, I2=62%) and airborne-particle abrasion with Al2O3 (P<.001, I2=98%). CONCLUSIONS: The best surface treatment protocol for repair varied according to the restorative material. HF followed by silanization is suggested for PICs, and airborne-particle abrasion with Al2O3 or preparation with a diamond rotary instrument for RNCs.

Masticatory performance of denture wearers with the use of denture adhesives: A systematic review.

STATEMENT OF PROBLEM: Denture adhesives are products used by wearers of removable dental prosthesis; however, systematic reviews on their influence on masticatory performance are lacking. PURPOSE: The purpose of this systematic review was to evaluate the efficiency of denture adhesives in improving the masticatory performance of users of complete dentures (CD). MATERIAL AND METHODS: This systematic review was organized from the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses checklist, and the methods were registered on the international prospective register of systematic reviews (PROSPERO-CRD42020187385). The focus question was as follows: "Does the use of denture adhesives improve the masticatory performance of patients with removable dental prostheses?" The databases PubMed/MEDLINE, Scopus, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library were used to extract information. RESULTS: The search yielded 1338 articles, of which 6 met the inclusion criteria and were selected. All included studies were crossover randomized controlled trials including bimaxillary edentulous individuals. Masticatory performance was evaluated by using a comminution and sieve method. CONCLUSIONS: Denture adhesives significantly increased the masticatory performance of CD users.