3D‐printed intracoronal restorations, occlusal and laminate veneers: Clinical relevance, properties, and behavior compared to milled restorations; a systematic review and meta‐analysis

Mohammed Ahmed Alghauli,Ahmed Yaseen Alqutaibi
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/jerd.13228
2024-03-31
Journal of Esthetic and Restorative Dentistry
Abstract:Objectives To assess the feasibility of producing 3D‐printed intracoronal restorations, thin and ultrathin veneers, and to compare their mechanical behavior, accuracy, biological, and stain susceptibility to the currently applied milled restorations. Materials and Methods The databases were comprehensively searched for relevant records up to January 2024 without language restrictions. All studies that assessed 3D‐printed partial coverage restorations including inlays, onlays, laminate, and occlusal veneers were retrieved. Results The web search yielded a total of 1142 records, with 8 additional records added from websites at a later stage. Only 17 records were ultimately included in the review. The included records compared 3D‐printed; alumina‐based‐ and zirconia ceramics, lithium disilicate ceramics, polymer infiltrated ceramics, polyetheretherketone (PEEK), resin composites, and acrylic resins to their CNC milled analogs. The pooled data indicated that it is possible to produce ultrathin restorations with a thickness of less than 0.2 mm. 3D‐printed laminate veneers and intracoronal restorations exhibited superior trueness, as well as better marginal and internal fit compared to milled restorations (p
dentistry, oral surgery & medicine
What problem does this paper attempt to address?