RESUMEN
STATEMENT OF PROBLEM: Surface treatments for resin-ceramics have been developed to obtain a smooth surface and improve color stability. However, a consensus on the best treatment for these materials is lacking. PURPOSE: The purpose of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to evaluate the color stability and roughness of glass-ceramics versus resin-ceramics with different surface treatments. MATERIAL AND METHODS: The preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses (PRISMA) guidelines were followed, and the study was registered in the open science framework (OSF) for in vitro studies. The population, intervention, control, and outcome (PICO) question was "Is there a difference in color stability and roughness between resin-ceramic vs vitreous ceramics in different surface treatment protocols?" A literature search was performed in PubMed/MEDLINE, Embase, Web of Science, Scopus, Cochrane Library, and ProQuest databases up to January 2023. The Joanna Briggs Institute's critical assessment guidelines for quasi-experimental studies were used for quality assessment. The meta-analysis was based on the inverse variance (IV) method (α=.05). RESULTS: A total of 18 laboratory studies were published between 2015 and 2022, with a total of 2160 specimens, all of which were analyzed qualitatively. The meta-analysis indicated significantly less optical alteration for lithium disilicate ceramics (P<.01; MD: 2.69; 95% CI: 2.00-3.39; I²=89%, P<.01), even when compared with resin-ceramics with polish or sealants (P<.01; MD: 2.45; 95% CI: 1.59-3.30; I²=87%, P<.01) and (P<.01; MD: 3.24; 95% CI: 2.02-4.47; I²=89%, P<.01), while there was no significant difference in surface roughness (P=.08; MD: -0.71; CI 95%: -1.52 to 0.09; I²=87%, P<.01) (P=.33; MD: -0.31; CI 95%: -0.94 to 0.32; I²=87%, P<.01), respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Resin-ceramics that have been polished or treated with sealants have lower color stability than glazed glass-ceramics; however, they are similar in terms of surface roughness.
RESUMEN
Polyetheretherketone (PEEK) resin is a high-performance thermoplastic polymer that has been introduced as a possible candidate to replace metallic components in dental prostheses. The objective of this integrative review was to compare, through analysis of studies in the literature, the mechanical performance of removable partial denture frameworks and clasps manufactured with PEEK with the performance of cobalt-chromium (Co-Cr) frameworks and clasps. The guiding question was, "Does the use of PEEK as a substitute for Co-Cr alloys for the construction of removable partial denture frameworks result in better mechanical properties?" The PubMed/ MEDLINE, Embase, Web of Science, Scopus, and SciELO databases were searched for articles published through October 2021. The JBI Critical Appraisal Checklist for Quasi-Experimental Studies was used to assess the methodologic quality of the selected in vitro studies. A total of 208 articles were identified. After the exclusion of duplicates and articles that did not meet the inclusion criteria, 7 studies- -4 in vitro and 3 three-dimensional finite element analyses- -published between 2012 and 2021 were included in the integrative review. The appraisal checklist revealed that the reviewed studies had a low risk of bias and high methodologic quality. The results of the review showed that PEEK alloys have adequate mechanical properties for use in clasps and removable partial denture frameworks, but Co-Cr alloys exhibit better mechanical properties and are more suitable in most circumstances.
