• F Lobbezoo, J Van Der Zaag, and M Naeije.
• Department of Oral Function, Academic Centre for Dentistry Amsterdam (ACTA), Amsterdam, The Netherlands. f.lobbezoo@acta.nl
• J Oral Rehabil. 2006 Apr 1;33(4):293-300.

AbstractThere is a growing interest in bruxism, as evidenced by the rapidly increasing number of papers about this subject during the past 5 years. The aim of the present review was to provide an update of two previous reviews from our department (one about the aetiology of bruxism and the other about the possible role of this movement disorder in the failure of dental implants) and to describe the details of the literature search strategies used, thus enabling the readers to judge the completeness of the review. Most studies that were published about the etiology during the past 5 years corroborate the previously drawn conclusions. Similarly, the update of the review about the possible causal relationship between bruxism and implant failure reveals no new points of view. Thus, there is no reason to assume otherwise than that bruxism is mainly regulated centrally, not peripherally, and that there is still insufficient evidence to support or refute a causal relationship between bruxism and implant failure. This illustrates that there is a vast need for well-designed studies to study both the aetiology of bruxism and its purported relationship with implant failure.

15 keywords...

hide…