Resin cement selection for different types of fixed partial coverage restorations: A narrative systematic review

Abstract

Abstract Objective The aim of this study was to review the selection criteria of resin cements for different types of partial coverage restorations (PCRs) and investigate if the type of restorations or restorative materials affect the type of selected resin cement. Materials and Methods An electronic search (1991–2023) was performed in PubMed, Medline, Scopus, and Google Scholar databases by combinations of related keywords. Results A total of 68 articles were included to review the selection criteria based on the advantages, disadvantages, indications, and performance of resin cements for different types of PCRs. Conclusions The survival and success of PCRs are largely affected by appropriate cement selection. Self‐curing and dual‐curing resin cements have been recommended for the cementation of metallic PCRs. The PCRs fabricated from thin, translucent, and low‐strength ceramics could be adhesively bonded by light‐cure conventional resin cements. Self‐etching and self‐adhesive cements, especially dual‐cure types, are not generally indicated for laminate veneers.

Keywords

• ceramics
• dental bonding
• dental veneer
• resin cements
• resin bonded ceramic