ABSTRACT
Objective:To evaluate the clinical outcome of all-ceramic and metal-ceramic restorations by means of Meta-analysis. Methods:The relevant randomized controlled trials ( RCTs) were electronically searched from PubMed, the Cochrane Library, EM-base, SinoMed, Weipu databases, CNKI and Wanfang. After data extraction and bias evaluation the Meta-analysis was conducted using RevMan 5. 3 software. Results:Finally 15 RCTs involving 768 all-ceramic restorations and 1386 Metal-ceramic restorations met the eli-gibility criteria. The results showed that, compared with metal-ceramic restorations, all-ceramic restorations could significantly decrease the risk of gingivitis(RR=0. 30,95%CI=0. 10-0. 90, P=0. 03),could decrease secondary caries and improve the satisfaction of cervical discoloration and marginal adaptation but without significant difference. There was no difference in color match and chipping of the veneering ceramics. However, all-ceramic restorations may lead to loss of the abutment tooth vitality. The risk of all-ceramic frame-work fracture while adopting fixed bridges was significantly higher(RR=6. 24, 95%CI=1. 20 -32. 41, P=0. 03). Conclusion:Based on the existing limited evidence,the efficacy of all-ceramic restorations is better than metal-ceramic restorations. But the intensity of all-ceramic bridges needs to be improved.