ArticleEvidence-based dentistry2026
The influence of overhanging proximal restorations on periodontal parameters: a systematic review and meta analysis.
Article in Evidence-based dentistry, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveOverhanging proximal restorations are considered a risk indicator for adverse periodontal parameters and could affect the progression of periodontitis. The objective of this systematic review was to determine the association between overhanging proximal restorations in posterior teeth and periodontal parameters. DATA SOURCES: Electronic databases were systematically searched from inception to April 2025; Clarivate Analytics Web of Science, MEDLINE (via PubMed), Embase and Scopus. DATA SELECTION AND EXTRACTION: Potential studies (case-control, cohort, cross-sectional, randomized clinical trials, non-randomized clinical trials) examining proximal restorations in posterior teeth and periodontal parameters were considered for inclusion by two independent reviewers in duplicate. The certainty of evidence was graded using the GRADE approach. Data were pooled using a random-effects model and an Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) framework was applied to rank the association of proximal restorations on periodontal health. After removing duplicate results and non-related studies, 54 studies were screened for full-text. Of these, 30 were excluded for different reasons leaving a total of 24 included studies. DATA SYNTHESIS: 24 studies (n = 5955 participants) from multiple countries were included, most with cross-sectional designs. Meta-analysis of eight studies (17,300 teeth/surfaces) showed overhanging proximal restorations were associated with greater radiographic bone loss (mean difference = 0.58 mm; 95% CI: 0.12-1.04 mm), reduced to 0.35 mm after sensitivity analysis. Compared to non-overhanging restorations, overhangs showed significantly greater bone loss (0.82 mm; 95% CI: 0.21-1.43 mm). Three studies (27,679 teeth/surfaces) found increased probing depth (0.28 mm; 95% CI: 0.26-0.30 mm). Risk of bias was high in 42% of studies; the certainty of evidence for bone loss and probing depth was graded low.
conclusionsLow certainty evidence indicates that overhanging proximal restorations in posterior teeth are associated with increased radiographic bone loss and slight increases in probing depth.
Identifiers
42642462What 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.