Clinical Performance of Strip vs Zirconia Crowns in 2-6-year-old: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

Q3 Dentistry
Rashmi A Dongarwar, Ritesh R Kalaskar, Sandeep R Pipare, Shivani Sawant, Anija Chandanakunnummal
{"title":"Clinical Performance of Strip vs Zirconia Crowns in 2-6-year-old: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.","authors":"Rashmi A Dongarwar, Ritesh R Kalaskar, Sandeep R Pipare, Shivani Sawant, Anija Chandanakunnummal","doi":"10.5005/jp-journals-10024-3817","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Aim: </strong>To assess and evaluate the clinical performance of strip crowns and zirconia crowns as full coverage restorations in children aged 2-6 years, with a focus on gingival health, retention, and recurrent caries.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>The current systematic review was drafted by following the recommendations of the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-analysis (PRISMA) checklist. Major electronic databases such as PubMed, PubMed Central, Cochrane Library, EMBASE, Scopus, ScienceDirect, Web of Science, ProQuest, registers, or gray literature and other reports such as websites, organizations, citations, etc., were thoroughly searched to find publications from 1995 up to January 2024. Following the population, intervention, comparison, and outcome (PICO) guideline: (i) Population: maxillary primary anterior teeth in 2-6-year-old children, (ii) Intervention: Zirconia crowns, (iii) Comparison: Strip crown, (iv) Outcome: plaque accumulation, gingival bleeding, recurrent caries, and crown retention were considered. Randomized clinical trial published in English comparing zirconia crowns and strip crowns among 2-6-year-old children are included.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Out of 446 studies initially identified, 441 were excluded due to duplication, non-English language, or not meeting inclusion criteria. Five studies that met the necessary criteria for quantitative and qualitative analysis were included. Zirconia crowns showed lower gingival bleeding, better retention, and no secondary caries compared to strip crowns at 3, 6, and 12 months, with minimal publication bias. However, the differences were not statistically significant.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Zirconia crowns demonstrate reduced gingival bleeding, superior retention, and an absence of secondary caries over 6, 9, and 12 months in maxillary primary anterior teeth among children aged 2-6 years.</p><p><strong>Clinical significance: </strong>In children aged 2-6 years, zirconia crowns are highly suitable for long-term restorations due to their superior durability, esthetics, and ability to enhance patient satisfaction. They are ideal for cases where functional and esthetic outcomes are priorities. Conversely, strip crowns serve as a practical option for temporary or intermediate restorations, offering a less invasive and cost-effective solution for managing primary teeth until definitive treatment is required. How to cite this article: Dongarwar RA, Kalaskar RR, Pipare SR, <i>et al.</i> Clinical Performance of Strip vs Zirconia Crowns in 2-6-year-old: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis. J Contemp Dent Pract 2025;26(1):93-102.</p>","PeriodicalId":35792,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Contemporary Dental Practice","volume":"26 1","pages":"93-102"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Contemporary Dental Practice","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5005/jp-journals-10024-3817","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Dentistry","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Aim: To assess and evaluate the clinical performance of strip crowns and zirconia crowns as full coverage restorations in children aged 2-6 years, with a focus on gingival health, retention, and recurrent caries.

Materials and methods: The current systematic review was drafted by following the recommendations of the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-analysis (PRISMA) checklist. Major electronic databases such as PubMed, PubMed Central, Cochrane Library, EMBASE, Scopus, ScienceDirect, Web of Science, ProQuest, registers, or gray literature and other reports such as websites, organizations, citations, etc., were thoroughly searched to find publications from 1995 up to January 2024. Following the population, intervention, comparison, and outcome (PICO) guideline: (i) Population: maxillary primary anterior teeth in 2-6-year-old children, (ii) Intervention: Zirconia crowns, (iii) Comparison: Strip crown, (iv) Outcome: plaque accumulation, gingival bleeding, recurrent caries, and crown retention were considered. Randomized clinical trial published in English comparing zirconia crowns and strip crowns among 2-6-year-old children are included.

Results: Out of 446 studies initially identified, 441 were excluded due to duplication, non-English language, or not meeting inclusion criteria. Five studies that met the necessary criteria for quantitative and qualitative analysis were included. Zirconia crowns showed lower gingival bleeding, better retention, and no secondary caries compared to strip crowns at 3, 6, and 12 months, with minimal publication bias. However, the differences were not statistically significant.

Conclusion: Zirconia crowns demonstrate reduced gingival bleeding, superior retention, and an absence of secondary caries over 6, 9, and 12 months in maxillary primary anterior teeth among children aged 2-6 years.

Clinical significance: In children aged 2-6 years, zirconia crowns are highly suitable for long-term restorations due to their superior durability, esthetics, and ability to enhance patient satisfaction. They are ideal for cases where functional and esthetic outcomes are priorities. Conversely, strip crowns serve as a practical option for temporary or intermediate restorations, offering a less invasive and cost-effective solution for managing primary teeth until definitive treatment is required. How to cite this article: Dongarwar RA, Kalaskar RR, Pipare SR, et al. Clinical Performance of Strip vs Zirconia Crowns in 2-6-year-old: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis. J Contemp Dent Pract 2025;26(1):93-102.

带状与氧化锆冠在2-6岁儿童中的临床表现:系统回顾和meta分析。
目的:评估和评价带状冠和氧化锆冠作为全覆盖修复体在2-6岁儿童中的临床表现,重点关注牙龈健康、固位和复发性龋病。材料和方法:当前的系统评价是按照系统评价和荟萃分析首选报告项目(PRISMA)清单的建议起草的。对主要电子数据库PubMed、PubMed Central、Cochrane Library、EMBASE、Scopus、ScienceDirect、Web of Science、ProQuest、register、灰色文献和其他报告(如网站、组织、引文等)进行全面检索,查找1995年至2024年1月的出版物。根据人群,干预,比较和结果(PICO)指南:(i)人群:2-6岁儿童上颌初级前牙,(ii)干预:氧化锆冠,(iii)比较:条冠,(iv)结果:考虑菌斑积累,牙龈出血,复发性龋齿和冠保留。纳入了在2-6岁儿童中发表的比较氧化锆冠和带状冠的随机临床试验。结果:在最初确定的446项研究中,441项因重复、非英语语言或不符合纳入标准而被排除。5项研究符合定量和定性分析的必要标准。在3、6和12个月时,与带状冠相比,氧化锆冠的牙龈出血更少,固位更好,没有继发性龋齿,发表偏倚最小。然而,差异没有统计学意义。结论:在2-6岁的儿童中,氧化锆冠可以减少牙龈出血,保持良好,并且在6、9和12个月的时间里没有继发性龋齿。临床意义:在2-6岁的儿童中,氧化锆冠具有耐久性好、美观、提高患者满意度等优点,非常适合用于长期修复。他们是理想的情况下,功能和美观的结果是优先考虑的。相反,条带冠作为临时或中期修复的实用选择,为管理乳牙提供了一种侵入性较小且经济有效的解决方案,直到需要进行最终治疗。如何引用本文:Dongarwar RA, Kalaskar RR, Pipare SR等。带状与氧化锆冠在2-6岁儿童中的临床表现:系统回顾和meta分析。现代医疗实践[J]; 2015;26(1):93-102。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Journal of Contemporary Dental Practice
Journal of Contemporary Dental Practice Dentistry-Dentistry (all)
CiteScore
1.80
自引率
0.00%
发文量
174
期刊介绍: The Journal of Contemporary Dental Practice (JCDP), is a peer-reviewed, open access MEDLINE indexed journal. The journal’s full text is available online at http://www.thejcdp.com. The journal allows free access (open access) to its contents. Articles with clinical relevance will be given preference for publication. The Journal publishes original research papers, review articles, rare and novel case reports, and clinical techniques. Manuscripts are invited from all specialties of dentistry i.e., conservative dentistry and endodontics, dentofacial orthopedics and orthodontics, oral medicine and radiology, oral pathology, oral surgery, orodental diseases, pediatric dentistry, implantology, periodontics, clinical aspects of public health dentistry, and prosthodontics.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信