Diferentes técnicas de reparo de cerâmicas vítreas com resina composta afetam a sobrevida da restauração e a resistência de união do reparo? Uma revisão sistemática e meta-análise

Abstract

Glass-ceramics have a combination of satisfactory aesthetic and mechanical properties, which possibility their indication for most indirect restorations. However, these materials are subject to structural failures, and can chip, crack or fracture. The repair procedures seem to be an important resource to keep and increase the restorations survival in the oral cavity. However, the lack of consensus on the clinical repair protocol still generates a lot of confusion among professionals. Therefore, the objective was to evaluate, through a systematic review and meta-analysis, the influence of different treatments used in glass-ceramics surfaces to repair with composite resins. Computerized searches were performed in PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science and Embase databases. A combination of MeSH and free terms with the Boolean operators OR and AND, following the syntax rules of each database was used. A complementary search on Google Scholar and OpenGrey was also performed, and there were no restrictions on language or publication year. After identifying the records in each database, the search results were exported to the Rayyan QCRI. The identification, selection, eligibility and inclusion steps of studies were carried out respecting the PRISMA statement. The included studies methodological quality was assessed following the OHAT Risk of Bias Rating Tool for Human and Animal Studies. The results of meta-analysis were provided in mean difference and 95% confidence interval. Statistical heterogeneity was assessed with the I2, and the random effect model was used. The search identified 5037 studies and 165 were assessed for eligibility. Finally, 123 in vitro studies were included in the systematic review and 48 in the meta-analysis. Considering different glass-ceramics, bond strength tests, and the specimens aging or not, 37 meta-analyses showed the effect of repair protocols including only an adhesive system application; silane plus adhesive system alone or preceded by hydrofluoric acid (HF), air abrasion (AA) with aluminum oxide particles, sandblasting (SB) with aluminum trioxide particles coated with silica, diamond bur (DB) or laser irradiation (LI). For feldspathic ceramics, HF acid, AA, SB, or DB improve repair micromechanical retention; applying silane is essential to HF conditioned surface, but adhesive is facultative when silane is applied. For leucite and lithium disilicate-reinforced ceramics, the results were insufficient to suggest another treatment besides HF acid plus silane and adhesive application.