• Users Online: 648
  • Home
  • Print this page
  • Email this page
Home About us Editorial board Ahead of print Current issue Search Archives Submit article Instructions Subscribe Contacts Login 
Year : 2020  |  Volume : 20  |  Issue : 4  |  Page : 338-344

Marginal and internal adaptation of lithium disilicate partial restorations: A systematic review and meta-analysis

1 Department of Operative Dentistry, Endodontics and Dental Materials, Bauru School of Dentistry, University of Sao Paulo, Bauru, Brazil
2 Department of Dental Materials and Prosthodontics, Sao Paulo State University (UNESP), School of Dentistry, Araçatuba, Sao Paulo, Brazil
3 Department of Dental Materials and Prosthodontics, University Center of Pará (CESUPA), Pará, Brazil
4 Department of Prosthodontics and Periodontology, Bauru School of Dentistry, University of Sao Paulo, Bauru, Brazil

Correspondence Address:
Dr. Natalia Almeida Bastos
Al. Dr. Otávio Pinheiro Brisolla 9-75, Vila Universitária, Bauru, Sao Paulo
Login to access the Email id

Source of Support: None, Conflict of Interest: None

DOI: 10.4103/jips.jips_112_20

Rights and Permissions

Aim: The aim of this meta analysis was to evaluate the influence of the processing method on the marginal and internal gaps of lithium disilicate inlays/onlays. Settings and Design: A systematic literature review was conducted using the PubMed/Medline, Embase, Scopus, and Cochrane Library databases. This review was registered on the PROSPERO platform. Materials and Methods: The studies were selected according to the marginal and internal gaps of two different fabrication methods for lithium disilicate (milled and pressed). Statistical Analysis Used: The meta analysis was performed based on the Mantel–Haenszel and inverse variance methods, using the random effects model and a 95% confidence interval. Results: From all databases, 127 studies were identified. Four in vitro studies were included in the qualitative analysis and three in the meta analysis. Moreover, 197 restorations were evaluated (103 pressed and 94 milled). During the evaluation of only the internal gap, there was a statistically significant difference favoring the pressed technique (P = 0.002). There was no statistically significant difference in the analyses of the marginal gap (P = 0.530) and the total gap (P = 0.450). Conclusion: Both the techniques provided acceptable marginal and total gaps, although the pressed technique revealed a more favorable internal adaptation than the milled onlays/inlays.

Print this article     Email this article
 Next article
 Previous article
 Table of Contents

 Similar in PUBMED
   Search Pubmed for
   Search in Google Scholar for
 Related articles
 Citation Manager
 Access Statistics
 Reader Comments
 Email Alert *
 Add to My List *
 * Requires registration (Free)

 Article Access Statistics
    PDF Downloaded184    
    Comments [Add]    

Recommend this journal