• Mayssoon Dashash, C Albert Yeung, Issam Jamous, and Anthony Blinkhorn.
• Department of Paediatric Dentistry, Faculty of Dentistry, University of Damascus, Damascus, Syrian Arab Republic. mdashash@yahoo.com.
• Cochrane Db Syst Rev. 2013 Jun 6 (6): CD007157.

BackgroundAmelogenesis imperfecta (AI) is a tooth development disorder in which the teeth are covered with thin, abnormally formed enamel. This enamel is easily fractured and damaged, which affects the appearance of the teeth, especially if left untreated. Negative psychological outcomes, due to compromised appearance and function, in patients with AI, have been found to compromise a person's attractiveness and reduce social interaction. The treatment used depends on the severity of the problem.ObjectivesTo compare the success rates of different restorative materials and techniques used for the restoration of anterior and posterior teeth with AI in terms of patient satisfaction (aesthetics and sensitivity) and function.Search MethodsWe searched the Cochrane Oral Health Group's Trials Register (to 18 April 2013), the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (The Cochrane Library 2013, Issue 3), MEDLINE via OVID (1946 to 18 April 2013), EMBASE via OVID (1980 to 18 April 2013), CINAHL via EBSCO (1980 to 18 April 2013), Abstracts of the Conference Proceedings of the International Association for Dental Research (2001 to 18 April 2013) and reference lists of relevant articles. There were no restrictions on language or date of publication in the electronic searches.Selection CriteriaRandomised controlled trials where children and adolescents with AI who required restoration of teeth were allocated to different restoration techniques would have been selected. Outcomes which would have been evaluated were patient satisfaction, aesthetics, masticatory function and longevity of restorations.Data Collection And AnalysisTwo review authors would have extracted data and assessed the risk of bias in included studies independently. Disagreement between the two authors would have been resolved by consulting a third review author. First authors were contacted for additional information and unpublished data.Main ResultsNo studies met the inclusion criteria for this review.Authors' ConclusionsWe found no randomised controlled trials of restorative treatments for children and adolescents with AI, and therefore there is no evidence as to which is the best restoration. Well defined randomised controlled trials which recruit children and adolescents and focus on the type and severity of the disorder should be undertaken to determine the best intervention for restoring teeth affected by AI.

6 keywords...

hide…