PulseExploreJournal ClubDebatesTrendingResearchersJournals
Instagram
HomeExploreJournal ClubTrending
Synapse
⌘+K
Synapse
March 21, 2026The Saudi Dental Journal0 citationsOpen Access

“Vertical safety zone” as a clinical framework: Is temporarization necessary when increasing VDO within the VDR? A systematic review and meta-analysis

OHOsama HajeerAHAmal Mohamed Hasan

Key Points

  • The review aims to determine if a temporary phase improves outcomes when increasing VDO within the vertical dimension at rest.
  • Conducted a systematic review following PRISMA 2020 guidelines.
  • Searched for clinical studies in PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, and Embase.
  • Evaluated full-mouth or multi-unit rehabilitations with increased VDO ≤ VDR.
  • Assessed risk of bias using ROBINS-I and evidence certainty with GRADE analysis.
  • Performed meta-analysis using a random-effects model on applicable studies.
  • Nine studies met the inclusion criteria, including four providing quantitative data.
  • Pooled replacement-free survival rate was 97.8%, and clinical success rate was 94.0%.
  • Average annual failure rate was 1.28%.
  • No temporomandibular or muscular complications were reported when VDO was maintained within VDR limits.
  • Immediate definitive rehabilitation may be acceptable when VDO increases are within VDR.

Abstract

This systematic review synthesized clinical data to assess whether a temporarization phase improves outcomes compared to immediate definitive restorations when the vertical dimension of occlusion (VDO) is increased within or equal to the vertical dimension at rest (VDR). It aimed to clarify whether maintaining treatment within this physiologic range-a proposed "Vertical Safety Zone"-supports favorable restorative and functional outcomes. Following PRISMA 2020 guidelines, we searched PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, and Embase for studies evaluating full-mouth or multi-unit rehabilitations with increased VDO ≤ VDR. Risk of bias was assessed using ROBINS-I, and certainty of evidence rated using GRADE. Meta-analysis was conducted using a random-effects model when applicable. Nine studies met inclusion criteria, with four contributing quantitative data (2,201 restorations, 3-5.5 years' follow-up). The pooled replacement-free survival rate was 97.8% (95% CI: 95.6-98.9%), and clinical success (including minor repairs) was 94.0% (95% CI: 90.5-96.5%). The annual failure rate averaged 1.28% (95% CI: 0.7-2.1%). No study reported temporomandibular or muscular complications when VDO remained within VDR limits. Temporarization protocols, when used, were typically short (< 48 h). When VDO increases are confined within the VDR, immediate definitive rehabilitation may be a viable alternative to temporarization. Although direct comparisons were limited, the findings suggest that staying within this "Vertical Safety Zone" preserves neuromuscular harmony and restoration longevity. The concept should be considered a useful framework for clinical planning, pending further controlled validation.

Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Cite This Study

Hajeer et al. (2026) studied this question.

synapsesocial.com/papers/69be362d6e48c4981c674ddchttps://doi.org/10.1007/s44445-026-00146-y
Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper