Bilateral balanced occlusion compared to other occlusal schemes in complete dentures: A systematic review

Summary

No consensus has been reached regarding the best occlusal scheme for making complete dentures. Thus, the purpose of this systematic review was to compare bilateral balanced occlusion (BBO) with other occlusal schemes (canine guidance, lingualized occlusion, and zero degree) in complete dentures. The schemes were compared in terms of quality of life/satisfaction and masticatory performance. Two independent reviewers performed a comprehensive search of studies published in or before October 2017 using the PubMed/MEDLINE, Scopus, and Cochrane Library databases. The search was performed in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) statement. The focused question was: "In conventional complete denture, is bilateral balanced occlusion better than lingualized occlusion, canine guidance and zero degree in terms of quality of life, patient satisfaction and masticatory performance?". Seventeen studies were selected for analysis. In total, there were 492 patients with a mean age of 64.78 years and a mean follow-up duration of 2.96 months (range: 1–6 months). All studies compared BBO with the other occlusal schemes. Eleven studies evaluated the influence of the occlusal scheme designs on quality of life and satisfaction and eight studies evaluated masticatory performance and muscle activity between BBO and the other occlusion schemes. The present systematic review indicated that BBO does not confer better quality of life/satisfaction or masticatory performance and muscle activity. Thus, LO can be considered a predictable occlusal scheme for complete dentures in terms of quality of life/satisfaction, and masticatory performance, while CG can be used to reduce muscular activity.

This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.

from Rehabilitation via xlomafota13 on Inoreader http://ift.tt/2qmFhgt
via IFTTT