Proximal enamel thickness of the permanent teeth: A systematic review and meta-analysis

This systematic review aimed to identify, evaluate, and provide a synthesis of the available literature on the proximal enamel thickness (PET) of permanent teeth.

The eligibility criteria were studies that assessed the PET of the permanent teeth. A search of studies in Medline (via PubMed), the Cochrane Library, Scopus, Web of Science, Embase, and Lilacs databases that measured PET was conducted until August 31, 2020. Two reviewers independently selected the studies, extracted the data, and assessed the risk of bias for systematic reviews involving cross-sectional studies. The quality of evidence was assessed using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluations approach. PET data generated from the systematic review were summarized by random-effects inverse-generic meta-analysis.

From 1388 potentially eligible studies, 11 were considered for systematic review and meta-analysis. The measurement of PET was done with radiographs, microscopes, microtomographs, or profilometers. In total, 4019 mesial and distal surfaces involving 2118 teeth were assessed. All included studies showed low to moderate risk of bias, whereas GRADE revealed that the level of evidence was low. Greater mesial and distal enamel thickness was observed for the premolars and molars, whereas it was least for the mandibular central incisors. The least difference of 0.02 mm (95% confidence interval [CI], -0.07 to 0.11 and -0.06 to 0.09, respectively) between mesial and distal sides was observed for the maxillary and mandibular second molars, whereas the maximum difference of 0.12 mm (95% CI, 0.07-0.17 and 0.07-0.16, respectively) was observed for the maxillary central incisors and maxillary first premolars. The meta-analysis indicated a moderate level of heterogeneity (I² of 45%). The funnel plot revealed minimal publication bias.

The summary effect of the meta-analysis revealed that the thickness of the enamel on the distal aspect was greater than on the mesial aspect by an average of 0.10 mm (95% CI, 0.09-0.12). This finding would be of relevance to all disciplines of dentistry and especially for the clinician planning interproximal reduction, a procedure that is routinely done for clear aligner therapy.