Recent Techniques for Removal of Indirect Restorations: Classification and Minimally Invasive Approach

Author(s):

Abdulrahman Jafar Alhaddad*, Samar Hatem Abuzinadah, Tamim Alkhalifah, Dina Alkhozaim, Imtenan Alnasser, Haya Alfaleh, Nada Alrkabee, Lama Almohaimeed, Khalid Almutlaq, Rola Alhusayni, Shouq Aljohani, Talal Alamoudi, Ahmad Aldusari, Khames T Alzahrani and Osama Ahmed Qutub

Background: When removing a prosthesis, meticulous preparation is required to assure effectiveness and avoid harm underneath oral tissues. They can range from standard dental clinic equipment like scalar tips, chisel and hammer to specialist cranial disintegration tools like crown extractor forceps, pressure delivery devices, crown sectioning burs, and crown splitter. The study`s goal is to present the findings of a systematic, evidenced literature review on recent techniques for removal indirect restorations: Classification and minimally invasive approach. Literature Review: Department of prosthodontic, king Abdulaziz University, Saudi Arabia between June 2020 and November 2021. A systematic search of the literature was conducted up to 2021 in seven electronic databases (Web of Science Core Collection, Brain, Pub Med, Science Direct database, NCBI, Google Scholar, Scopus, and Saudi digital library). The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) statement. The initial search resulted in 96 papers. only 22 studies were chosen for systematic review. Results: The first search showed 96 articles. A total of 24 duplicates were eliminated. After filtering by reading titles and abstracts and discarding any extraneous topics or goals that are not directly connected to this systematic review, the first phase comprised 49 publications. There were 32 that needed to be reviewed and evaluated for eligibility. 22 articles were chosen for the final evaluation after full text screening. Conclusion: The article sorts all the methods of removal the indirect prosthesis techniques. It is impossible to apply a single approach to all situations. Every clinical situation is differing. Lasers as mentioned According to Morford in his study, the success rate of using laser for removing indirect restorations was 64% and only effective for debonding all-ceramic restorations.