Abstract
Data sources
Medline, Embase, the Cochrane Oral Health Group's Trials Register and CENTRAL. Unpublished literature was searched on ClinicalTrials.gov, the National Research Register, and Pro-Quest Dissertation Abstracts and Thesis database. Hand searching of reference lists only.
Study selection
Randomised controlled trials with a minimum of three years follow-up that compared direct to indirect inlays or onlays in posterior teeth. Primary outcome was failure (the need to replace or repair).
Data extraction and synthesis
Two reviewers independently and in duplicate performed the study selection and two extracted data independently using a customised data extraction form. The unit of analysis was the restored tooth. Risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool. Meta-analysis was conducted on two studies using the random-effects model.
Results
Three studies were included. Across these studies there were 239 participants in whom 424 restorations were placed. Two studies compared direct and indirect inlays and had follow-up of five and 11 years respectively. One study compared direct and indirect onlays with a follow-up of five years. The studies were at unclear or high risk of bias. For direct and indirect inlays, Relative Risk (RR) of failure after five years was 1.54 (95% Cl: 0.42, 5.58; p = 0.52) in one study and, in another was 0.95 (95% Cl: 0.34, 2.63; p = 0.92) over 11 years. For onlays there was also no statistically-significant difference in survival, though overall five-year survival was 87% (95% CI: 81–93%).
Conclusions
There is insufficient evidence to favour the direct or indirect technique for the restoration of posterior teeth with inlays and onlays.
Similar content being viewed by others
Log in or create a free account to read this content
Gain free access to this article, as well as selected content from this journal and more on nature.com
or
References
da Veiga AM, Cunha AC, Ferreira DM, et al. Longevity of direct and indirect resin composite restorations in permanent posterior teeth: A systematic review and meta-analysis. J Dent 2016; 54: 1–12
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Additional information
Address for correspondence: Dimitrios Kloukos, Department of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics, University of Bern, Freiburgstrasse 7, CH-3010 Bern, Switzerland. E-mail: dimitrios.kloukos@zmk.unibe.ch
Angeletaki F, Gkogkos A, Papazoglou E, Kloukos D. Direct versus indirect inlay/onlay composite restorations in posterior teeth. A systematic review and meta-analysis. J Dent 2016 Oct 31; 53:12–21.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Dhadwal, A., Hurst, D. No difference in the long-term clinical performance of direct and indirect inlay/onlay composite restorations in posterior teeth. Evid Based Dent 18, 121–122 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1038/sj.ebd.6401276
Published:
Issue date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/sj.ebd.6401276
