SynthesisJournal of esthetic and restorative dentistry : official publication of the American Academy of Esthetic Dentistry ... [et al.]2025
Vertical Versus Horizontal Finishing Lines for Dental Preparations: A Systematic Review With Meta-Analysis.
Synthesis in Journal of esthetic and restorative dentistry : official publication of the American Academy of Esthetic Dentistry ... [et al.], 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Impact of finish line designs on the adaptation of ceramic fixed dental prostheses: a systematic review and network meta-analysis.BMC oral health · 2025Pooled it
- Marginal adaptation of 3D-printed crowns: influence of preparation geometry and digitization workflow.BMC oral health · 2026Article
- Immediate versus delayed loading of implants in posterior mandible: A CBCT-based one-year comparative study.Bioinformation · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesTo evaluate the influence of horizontal and vertical dental preparation techniques on tooth-supported fixed restorations, with specific focus on survival and success rates, periodontal-related variables, and patient-reported outcome (PROs) measures.
methodsA comprehensive literature search of relevant randomized and controlled clinical trials (RCTs/CCTs), prospective/retrospective cohort studies, and case series with a minimum follow-up period of 3 years was performed across electronic databases (Medline, Embase, and Cochrane) up to January 2024. Primary outcomes included success and survival rates, and secondary outcomes included periodontal variables, both mechanical and biological complications, and PROs. Two reviewers independently conducted study selection, data extraction, and quality assessment. Of the 837 articles initially identified, 19 were included in the final analysis. A meta-analysis was conducted to compare the preparation techniques using survival and success rates as the main outcomes. Additionally, periodontal variables were analyzed.
resultsThe included studies varied in design, follow-up duration, restoration type, and materials used. Survival rates showed no significant differences between vertical and horizontal techniques (risk ratio (RR) 0.96-1.04, p = 0.95). Additionally, success rates (RR 0.93-1.14, p = 0.53) and periodontal variables also showed varied results with no clear preference for either technique.
conclusionsBoth the horizontal and vertical preparation techniques exhibited comparable survival and success rates for dental restorations. Given that there was no significant difference in outcomes between the two, the choice of technique may depend on the clinician's preference and specific clinical scenarios.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.