Abstract
Introduction: Dental anomalies present a significant challenge to clinicians due to their impact on both dental function and esthetics. The correction of these anomalies plays a critical role in improving the quality of life of our patients, highlighting the importance of this restorative work. Objective: The purpose of this systematic review is to assess the techniques used to restore various dental anomalies, and their subsequent esthetic impact on the overall dentition. Methods: Inclusion criteria consisted of restorative rehabilitations of the permanent dentition in non-syndromic patients with dental anomalies of morphology, structure, size, and number in the maxillary incisors. Exclusion criteria included surgical rehabilitation techniques, endodontic treatments, and anomalies of the primary dentition. The medical literature was systematically searched (Pubmed, PMC, Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Clinical trials, Scopus and Google Scholar) to identify all relevant articles reporting data regarding the chosen anomalies. ROBINS–I was used to assess the risk of bias tool, and the results were tabulate due to data heterogeneity. Results: Of the 1821 analyzed articles, 46 articles met the inclusion criteria, and were chosen to go through the final review procedure. Of the selected articles, 3 investigated amelogenesis imperfecta and dentinogenesis imperfecta, 1 analyzed conoid teeth, 1 considered hypodontia (other than MLIA), 3 concerned microdontia (excluding peg laterals and conoid teeth), 10 evaluated peg-shaped laterals, 2 investigated talon cusps and geminated teeth, 15 were regarding maxillary lateral incisor agenesis, and 11 papers were related to the perception of anomalies. Conclusions: Pre-visualization using Digital Smile Design, a treatment plan encompassing minimally invasive restorations, and using a multidisciplinary approach among practitioners helps the anomalous patient achieve the best possible esthetic result.
1. Introduction
The transformative power of an esthetic smile has proven to significantly enhance social perceptions, professional success, overall health, and emotional well-being [1].
However, the esthetics of a smile are significantly altered when we have anomalies of the dentition, e.g., if we are missing teeth, if we have extra teeth, or if our teeth are of an unusual morphology.
Dental anomalies present a significant challenge to clinicians due to their impact on both dental function and esthetics, which in most cases requires an interdisciplinary approach to finding solutions [2].
An anomaly is defined as anything that deviates from the accepted standard, normal or expected [3]. The objective of our restorative treatments is to correct dental anomalies and restore the affected dentition to a form that aligns with the established esthetic and functional standards.
Studies have shown that dental anomalies, on a parasocial relationships level [2], often cause psychological stress and diminished quality of life for individuals, which further highlights the need for and importance of effective esthetic restorative treatments.
While the prevalence of anomalies differs depending on factors such as gender and race, clinicians agree that no community is absolved of the occurrence of dental anomalies themselves.
Our systematic review aims to investigate how we go about restoring these anomalies, and what is needed to make our smile the most esthetic possible, in order to enhance our patients’ quality of life while also restoring appearance and functionality.
2. Rationale
As far as we are aware, in the current literature, there is no study to compare multiple dental anomalies and their restorative options, much less the esthetic outcome of these restorations in the anomalous dentition. Our reasoning behind covering multiple anomalies is that anomalies often occur simultaneously.
There are multiple studies conducted on restorative options to treat certain dental anomalies, such as lateral incisor agenesis [4,5,6,7]. However, there is very limited literature on the esthetic outcome of said restorations, nor the framework used to achieve the most esthetic restorations possible.
3. Objective
This systematic review aims to collate the available information on various dental anomalies of size, structure, number, and morphology of the maxillary incisors and lay out a clear framework for the various conservative rehabilitation techniques that can be performed to restore optimal esthetic appearance in conjunction with patient satisfaction.
We will systematically synthesize the relevant literature, providing evidence-based recommendations for clinical practice to identify areas where further research is needed.
The purpose of this review is to support dental professionals planning cases involving dental anomalies, ensuring they can decide the best available treatment option for their patient, with the most relevant literature.
3.1. Choice of Anomalies
After our initial literature search, we decided to combine multiple anomalies of size, structure, number, and morphology. This was due to the extensive studies showing the occurrence of more than one anomaly in an already anomalous dentition.
Multiple studies have shown that unilateral agenesis is often linked to the contralateral tooth’s corresponding microdontia [8,9]. There is also a proven link between agenesis and root morphological changes, such as short roots [10]. A link has also been found between hypodontia and its association with other anomalies [11]. Dentinogenesis imperfecta can also be associated with the short root anomaly [12].
There has been no review encompassing multiple anomalies of this magnitude, despite this evident overlap in its occurrence, necessitating the need for our review.
Chosen anomalies can be seen in Table 1.
Table 1.
Etiology, prevalence, and appearance of dental anomalies.
3.2. Prevalence
Obtaining accurate statistics on the prevalence of the various dental anomalies was challenging due to their variability across different races and countries. Comprehensive studies have only been conducted in select nations, such as this study conducted in Turkey [14].
Therefore, in the following infographic, it is important to remember there is a discrepancy between the various ethnic backgrounds.
4. Materials and Methods
4.1. Protocol and Registration
The review is in the process of being registered on PROSPERO (International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews). Prospero registration number ID, CRD42024532371.
4.2. Eligibility Criteria
We included as many of the relevant anomalies related to the maxillary incisors in adult patients with permanent dentition as possible, including anomalies of structure, size, number, and morphology.
Studies were grouped according to their anomaly, and the relevant restorative techniques and esthetic outcomes were noted.
See below (Table 2) for a detailed table of inclusion and exclusion criteria according to our PICO criteria
Table 2.
Inclusion and exclusion criteria.
4.3. Information Sources
We did not restrict searches to particular results because of the diversity of available studies. However, all studies reporting on dental anomalies, esthetics, and restorative rehabilitation techniques were included to collate all relevant treatment methods, which were later screened and filtered according to our inclusion and exclusion criteria.
The search for available literature was performed according to the PRISMA guidelines [19] by searching Pubmed, Google Scholar, Embase, Cochrane Library, and Scopus databases until 15 May 2024.
4.4. Search Strategy
The search strategy consisted of two separate searches, the first relating to the relevant anomalies and restorative restorations and the second to the relevant anomalies and esthetic dentistry. The search also incorporated [MeSH] terms on the relevant platforms.
Filters were placed for the search results including the year of publication and the language. The limit was placed in terms of year of publication—only articles within the last 20 years were eligible. Results were filtered depending on the language—English. No additional filters were applied to the search results.
The search strategies were performed with consultation from an experienced research librarian, ensuring the identification of keywords and possible combinations to identify the most relevant studies for our subject topic.
4.4.1. Search 1 (Restorative Restoration)
Pubmed
(Dental anomalies OR “Tooth Abnormalities” [Mesh] OR amelogenesis imperfecta OR dentinogenesis imperfecta type 2 OR macrodontia OR microdontia OR short roots OR “Tooth, Supernumerary” [Mesh] OR incisor agenesis OR talon cusp OR Fused Teeth OR tooth gemination OR Dens in dente OR dens invaginatus OR peg-shaped laterals OR conoid teeth) AND maxillary incisors AND restorative restoration.
Google Scholar and Cochrane Library
(Dental anomalies) OR (amelogenesis imperfecta) OR (dentinogenesis imperfecta type 2) OR (macrodontia) OR (microdontia) OR (short roots) OR (supernumerary teeth) OR (incisor agenesis) OR (talon cusp) OR (tooth fusion) OR (tooth germination) OR (dens invaginatus) OR (peg-shaped laterals) OR (conoid teeth) AND (maxillary incisors) AND (esthetic dentistry).
Embase
(“dental anomalies”/exp OR “tooth malformation”/exp OR “amelogenesis imperfecta”/exp OR (“amelogenesis” AND “imperfecta”) OR “amelogenesis imperfecta” OR ((dental* OR tooth OR teeth) NEAR/2 (anomal* OR malformat* OR gemin* OR conoid*)) OR (“dentinogenesis” AND “imperfecta”) OR “dentinogenesis imperfecta type 2” OR “DI-2” OR “hereditary opalescent dentin” OR “macrodontia”/exp OR “macrodont*” OR “microdontia”/exp OR “microdont*” OR (short* AND “root*”) OR “supernumerary tooth”/exp OR “supernumerary tooth” OR “supernumerary teeth” OR (incisor* NEAR/2 agenesis) OR “talon cusp”/exp OR “talon cusp*” OR (“fused” AND “teeth”) OR “fused teeth” OR “invaginated tooth”/exp OR “dens invaginatus” OR “dens in dente” OR ((“dens” OR tooth OR teeth) NEAR/2 “invaginat*”) OR (“peg” AND “shap*” AND lateral*)) AND ((“maxilla”/exp OR “maxilla*”) AND (“incisor”/exp OR “incisor*”)) AND “restor*”.
Scopus
(TITLE-ABS-KEY ((amelogenesis AND imperfecta) OR “amelogenesis AND imperfecta”) OR TITLE-ABS-KEY (((dental* OR tooth OR teeth) AND (anomal* OR malformat* OR gemin* OR conoid*))) OR TITLE-ABS-KEY ((dentinogenesis AND imperfecta) OR “dentinogenesis AND imperfecta AND type AND 2′ OR “di-2” OR “hereditary AND opalescent AND dentin” OR macrodont* OR microdont*) OR TITLE-ABS-KEY ((short* AND root*) OR “supernumerary AND tooth” OR “supernumerary AND teeth” OR (incisor* AND agenesis) OR “talon AND cusp” OR (fused AND teeth) OR “fused AND teeth” OR “dens AND invaginatus” OR “dens AND in AND dente” OR ((dens OR tooth OR teeth) AND invaginat*) OR (peg AND shap* AND lateral*)) AND TITLE-ABS-KEY ((maxilla* AND incisor*)) AND TITLE-ABS-KEY (restor*)).
4.4.2. Search 2 (Esthetic Dentistry)
Pubmed
(dental anomalies OR “Tooth Abnormalities” [Mesh] OR amelogenesis imperfecta OR dentinogenesis imperfecta type 2 OR macrodontia OR microdontia OR short roots OR “Tooth, Supernumerary” [Mesh] OR incisor agenesis OR talon cusp OR Fused Teeth OR tooth gemination OR Dens in dente OR dens invaginatus OR peg-shaped laterals OR conoid teeth) AND maxillary incisors AND “Esthetics, Dental” [Mesh].
Google Scholar and Cochrane Library
(dental anomalies) OR (amelogenesis imperfecta) OR (dentinogenesis imperfecta type 2) OR (macrodontia) OR (microdontia) OR (short roots) OR (supernumerary teeth) OR (incisor agenesis) OR (talon cusp) OR (tooth fusion) OR (tooth germination) OR (dens invaginatus) OR (peg-shaped laterals) OR (conoid teeth) AND (maxillary incisors) AND (restorative restoration).
Embase
(“dental anomalies”/exp OR “dental anomalies” OR “tooth malformation”/exp OR “tooth malformation” OR ((“amelogenesis”/exp OR “amelogenesis”) AND “imperfecta”) OR “amelogenesis imperfecta”/exp OR “amelogenesis imperfecta” OR ((dental* OR tooth OR teeth) NEAR/2 (anomal* OR malformat* OR gemin* OR conoid*)) OR ((“dentinogenesis”/exp OR “dentinogenesis”) AND “imperfecta”) OR “dentinogenesis imperfecta type 2′ OR “di-2” OR “hereditary opalescent dentin” OR “macrodontia”/exp OR “macrodontia” OR “macrodont*” OR “microdontia”/exp OR “microdontia” OR “microdont*” OR (short* AND “root*”) OR “supernumerary tooth”/exp OR “supernumerary tooth” OR “supernumerary teeth”/exp OR “supernumerary teeth” OR (incisor* NEAR/2 agenesis) OR “talon cusp”/exp OR “talon cusp” OR “talon cusp*” OR (“fused” AND (“teeth”/exp OR “teeth”)) OR “fused teeth”/exp OR “fused teeth” OR “invaginated tooth”/exp OR “invaginated tooth” OR “dens invaginatus”/exp OR “dens invaginatus” OR “dens in dente”/exp OR “dens in dente” OR ((“dens” OR tooth OR teeth) NEAR/2 “invaginat*”) OR ((“peg”/exp OR “peg”) AND “shap*” AND lateral*)) AND (“maxilla”/exp OR “maxilla” OR “maxilla*”) AND (“incisor”/exp OR “incisor” OR “incisor*”) AND (“dental procedure”/exp OR “dental procedure” OR ((aesthetic* OR esthetic*) NEAR/2 (dentistry OR dental))) AND ([article]/lim OR [article in press]/lim OR [conference paper]/lim OR [conference review]/lim OR [data papers]/lim OR [editorial]/lim OR [letter]/lim OR [note]/lim OR [review]/lim OR [short survey]/lim).
Scopus
(TITLE-ABS-KEY ((amelogenesis AND imperfecta) OR “amelogenesis AND imperfecta”) OR TITLE-ABS-KEY (((dental* OR tooth OR teeth) AND (anomal* OR malformat* OR gemin* OR conoid*))) OR TITLE-ABS-KEY ((dentinogenesis AND imperfecta) OR “dentinogenesis AND imperfecta AND type AND 2′ OR “di-2” OR “hereditary AND opalescent AND dentin” OR macrodont* OR microdont*) OR TITLE-ABS-KEY ((short* AND root*) OR “supernumerary AND tooth” OR “supernumerary AND teeth” OR (incisor* AND agenesis) OR “talon AND cusp” OR (fused AND teeth) OR “fused AND teeth” OR “dens AND invaginatus” OR “dens AND in AND dente” OR ((dens OR tooth OR teeth) AND invaginat*) OR (peg AND shap* AND lateral*)) AND TITLE-ABS-KEY ((maxilla* AND incisor*)) AND TITLE-ABS-KEY (((aesthetic* OR esthetic*) AND (dentistry OR dental)))).
4.5. Selection Process
Title and abstract screening were performed double-blindly using Rayyan [20] by two authors (N.M.G., C.D.) to select articles for further reading and full-text retrieval. Duplicate papers were eliminated, and the authors selected the remaining papers independently. Authors (N.M.G., C.D.) then discussed papers selected for inclusion, and any disagreements were resolved by discussion and adhering strictly to the inclusion and exclusion criteria.
Full texts of the relevant papers were further examined to assess eligibility for data extraction. A manual search of the bibliographies in each article was also performed to identify any additional relevant papers.
4.6. Data Items and Data Collection Process
After discussion and agreement on the final articles, articles were divided evenly between authors (N.M.G., C.D.). Papers were divided into a series of subcategories according to their anomalies (Amelogenesis imperfecta + Dentinogenesis imperfecta, Conoid teeth, Hypodontia, Micro + Macrodontia, MLIA, Peg-shaped laterals, Talon cusp + Geminated teeth) and a separate category was made that was just dedicated to perception. Many of these anomalies can fall into multiple categories, i.e., conoid teeth and peg-shaped laterals in microdontia, MLIA into hypodontia; thus, it was decided that it would be placed into the relevant subcategories only if the anomaly was specifically stated in the title, otherwise it was placed in the broader category.
Data collected included a detailed description of the relevant intervention performed under the categories according to our PICO criteria; population, intervention-restorative rehabilitation, comparison, and, if applicable, a description of the esthetic parameters used to assess the outcome of the final restoration, under outcome-esthetics.
4.7. Study Risk of Bias Assessment
For this restorative treatment outcome review, we considered the quality of reported outcomes and rehabilitation to be crucial, so we selected ROBINS–I [21] as our risk of bias assessment tool. A breakdown of our critical appraisal results can be found below at Table 3.
Table 3.
ROBINS–I risk of bias assessment.
4.8. Synthesis Methods and Effect Measures
This systematic review’s articles were so diverse that conducting a meta-analysis was not practical. Rather, a qualitative synthesis was carried out by contrasting the restorative techniques with their esthetic results based on the groups that were assessed.
5. Results
5.1. Study Selection
Of the 1821 analyzed articles, 46 articles met all of our criteria [22,23,24,25,26,27,28,29,30,31,32,33,34,35,36,37,38,39,40,41,42,43,44,45,46,47,48,49,50,51,52,53,54,55,56,57,58,59,60,61,62,63,64], and were chosen to go through the final review procedure. Among the chosen articles, 3 investigated amelogenesis imperfecta and dentinogenesis imperfecta, 1 analyzed conoid teeth, 1 considered hypodontia (other than MLIA), 3 concerned microdontia (excluding peg laterals and conoid teeth), 10 evaluated peg-shaped laterals, 2 investigated talon cusps and geminated teeth, 15 were regarding maxillary lateral incisor agenesis, and 11 papers were related to the perception of anomalies.
See Figure 1 Prisma flow diagram and Table S1 (Supplementary File) displaying the detailed PRISMA checklist for a detailed breakdown.
Figure 1.
PRISMA flow diagram [19].
5.2. Study Characteristics
We split the studies into subgroups depending on their anomaly and also included another subgroup just for perception. Overlapping anomalies were put into the category that had the most in-depth information about the anomaly. In each paper, we extracted information on the study design, population, intervention/restorative technique, comparison, and outcome/esthetic impact.
5.3. Results of Individual Studies
A meta-analysis was not feasible due to the high level of heterogeneity among the included studies. We decided to use study tables (See below Table 4) to display our results.
Table 4.
Synthesis of results.
6. Discussion
6.1. Summary of Evidence
6.1.1. Amelogenesis Imperfect and Dentinogenesis Imperfecta
The studies highlight various interventions tailored to the specific conditions and needs of the patients. The prosthodontic pathway for individuals with tooth structure abnormalities [66] emphasizes minimal preparation to preserve tooth tissue. The use of veneers is particularly noteworthy, due to the difficulty with bonding of these structural anomalies [67], as it offers an esthetically pleasing and tissue-conservative alternative to crowns, which may not be suitable for severely affected teeth. Veneers are indicated in the anterior dentition, particularly if direct composite bonding has previously been attempted and proved unsuccessful [68].
Conventional crowns are successful in patients with AI and have been proven to be both durable and predictable, but with the marked disadvantage of being destructive of tooth tissue [69]. The risks in crown placement of AI patients include failure of cementation, material fracture, caries and endodontic treatment [70], all of which are also common complications of crowning teeth in the non-anomalous population.
In the case of minimally destructive management of AI and hypodontia [23], a combination of bleaching, gingivectomy, composite bonding, and cantilever bridges on canines were performed. This multifaceted approach not only addressed the esthetic concerns but also maintained the integrity of the remaining tooth structure. The emphasis on minimal invasiveness is evident in the choice of bleaching and composite bonding over more invasive procedures such as traditional veneers or bridges.
Similarly, bleaching was also used in another minimally invasive case [24] along with micro abrasion, which had a marked effect on the esthetic outcome. Bleaching is known to work well in cases of AI and fluorosis [71], and in these cases, at-home bleaching with custom trays of Carbamide Peroxide 15% for 2 weeks at home overnight is advised. Toothpaste containing 5% potassium nitrate on alternate nights is a good recommendation for those with AI and DI due to the increased sensitivity due to the nature of this anomaly [72].
The sequential use of crown lengthening, home bleaching, micro abrasion, and veneers demonstrates a comprehensive approach to improving both the esthetics and function of the dentition [24]. The use of a silicon key as a guide for veneer preparation underscores the importance of precision in achieving optimal esthetic outcomes.
6.1.2. Conoid Teeth
Not as many articles were retrieved on this topic, since the majority of conoid teeth literature we found in this area either involved an endodontic treatment or was extracted and therefore excluded from our results due to our criteria.
This case [25] used a mix of direct and indirect restorative methods to produce the most esthetic result. The minimally invasive techniques followed in the conservative preparation of the porcelain veneer of the conoid tooth are in line with what the biomimetic approach [73].
The treatment protocol in the article involves esthetic crown lengthening, bleaching, conservative preparations for ceramic laminate veneers, and direct composite restorations. The step-by-step process, including the use of silicon indices, ensures precise and controlled tooth reduction, preserving tooth structure while achieving optimal esthetic integration.
6.1.3. Hypodontia
The article emphasizes the need for thorough diagnostics and careful planning in managing hypodontia [26]. Dental technicians contribute significantly during the diagnostic phase by fabricating study casts, diagnostic wax-ups, and mock-ups, which aid in visualizing the final outcome and planning the treatment steps effectively [49,74].
The various restorative options include removable prostheses, interim fixed restorations, and definitive fixed restorations. The practical considerations for designing these anterior restorations involve understanding the esthetic and functional principles, such as the use of suitable abutment teeth, optimizing pontic design, and ensuring proper occlusion [75]. The article discusses the challenges in achieving these principles and provides practical solutions, such as modifications to abutment teeth. Canines that have been orthodontically repositioned are likely to rotate when relapsing [44]. Consequently, a cantilever lateral incisor bridge that is fixed to a canine may relapse.
Since a single restoration can be advantageous and have a high success rate, an alternative is to replace both lateral incisor teeth with a properly designed bridge from both maxillary central incisors. The mesial surface contact area of the pontic can be adjusted to simply overlap onto, but not bond to, the palatal surface of the neighboring central incisor tooth in order to lessen the possibility of rotational relapse, which would impact the lateral incisor pontic. The central incisor can still be adequately cleaned to lower the risk of caries, and this should be enough to stop outward rotation. Additionally, if the orthodontic treatment had closed a gap between the central incisor teeth, this design guarantees that the teeth will not relapse significantly [26].
6.1.4. Microdontia and Macrodontia
All three studies [27,28,30] emphasize the importance of accurate diagnostics and treatment planning. While Bolton analysis was a key diagnostic tool used in two of the selected studies [28,30], the third study introduces an alternative method for calculating ideal tooth sizes, based on the mandibular central incisor, which is less variable in size [27].
The studies employ a range of minimally invasive techniques. The first focuses on a comprehensive interdisciplinary approach [30], while the second combines bleaching, enameloplasty, and bonding to enhance esthetics [28]. The third highlights early restoration during orthodontic treatment; a few more advantages include lowering the likelihood of having insufficient room to complete the final restoration and using the tooth as a temporary restoration while the rest of the treatment is being performed to assess its size and color, which can then be readjusted [27].
All studies aim to achieve superior esthetic outcomes by considering multiple factors such as tooth size, shape, and gingival margins. The emphasis on minimally invasive techniques and thorough diagnostics is consistent across all studies, ensuring that the final restorations are both functional and visually pleasing.
6.1.5. Peg Laterals
These articles were mostly case reports. The main decision in the case of a peg lateral tooth is whether to pull the tooth and close the space or restore the original anomalous peg lateral [53]. To help decide the best option for each patient and their individual needs, a pre visualisation tool such as the Digital Smile Design was implemented in many cases [47,65].
If the peg lateral is retained, the next decision to be made is the type of restoration. Two main options are available and used: indirect method such as a veneer, or the direct method of composite bonding. However, a nice compromise was made in one of the cases, with a very good esthetic outcome, following the golden proportions, with a mix of both options in the form of a componeer [39].
When the indirect option is used, creating space for the prosthetic is vitally important. In the cases that used veneers, orthodontic movement was necessary to create adequate space for these restorations [51,71]. The space-creation technique uses interdental elastics to redistribute the patient’s diastemas, and it means there is no need for orthodontic appliances. However, caution must be taken as this technique can only be used for very short periods of time, if left for extended periods, even weeks, it can cause irreversible damage to the periodontal ligament [72].
For the direct option, composite bonding along with the putty technique was predominantly used, with very good esthetic outcomes [56,62]. A low interproximal space meant direct bonding was used in this case; conversely, in the same patient, veneers were chosen to mask the high interproximal space on the other peg-shaped incisor [65].
In terms of aestetic parameters, one study used the golden proportion [39] and another used the RED proportion [51].
6.1.6. Perception
The vast majority of the articles retrieved involved an observational study in which a smile was digitally altered, and involved the analysis of certain key parameters. Similarly, the population chosen for most of the studies was related to the difference in perception between dental professionals and laypeople.
Unsurprisingly, orthodontists were seen to be the most observant and critical of alterations from the so called “ideal smile” [56,60], which has been proven repeatedly in the literature [60]. An interesting observation was the fact that a person’s own dental history was shown to have an impact on their perception of ideal smile esthetics, with the hypodontia patients in this study preferring lateral incisors considerably longer than the other participants in the study [64].
A slight midline discrepancy was the least observable characteristic in multiple studies.
The smile line was also a matter of contention; the medium smile line was regarded as the most esthetic, in this study, whereas a high smile line with diastemas was seen as the least esthetic [56].
In the studies that compared space closure versus space opening, both showed a preference towards space closure, perceiving it as a more esthetic outcome [61,76,77]. Only the dental professionals perceived a difference in the gingival margins as important in the overall esthetics, whereas laypeople actually perceived it as less attractive [39,53].
Asymmetric situations were seen as unattractive for both laypeople and dental professionals [60].
The golden proportion was not always regarded as the most esthetically pleasing choice, according to studies that used it. This has also been observed in the literature [48,75]. It can still prove to be a useful guide for the proportions, but as this study showed, it proved it is a range depending on the individual and their smile characteristics [57,61].
6.1.7. Maxillary Lateral Incisor Agenesis
The selected articles supported the findings not only in the dental literature, but also in the other studied anomalies.
A very important factor in many of the orthodontic space-closure cases highlighted the importance of a light-colored canine. Canines are naturally darker in color with respect to their incisor counterparts due to their structural composition. This difference in color proved to be hugely important for the esthetic appearance, not only for dental professionals, but also laypeople [30,33]. This highlights the importance of pre-restorative bleaching in cases of orthodontic space closure.
Another frequent finding was in terms of the shape of the replacement canine. Pointed canines, those with a tip, were perceived as highly unesthetic. Many participants rated smiles with canine substitution as attractive only if the substituted canine approximated the lateral incisor in terms of shape, color, and gingival margin [30,33,45]. This sentiment was also backed up in terms of shape and their width, as the narrow canines were consistently perceived as more attractive [33].
Gingival margins were deemed very important for dental professionals, especially the orthodontists, but not perceived as important for laypeople [33]. This reiterates the earlier finding of dental professionals being more critical in their judgements [56]. Canine gingival height was the most attractive 0.5 mm below the gingival margin of the maxillary central incisor. A good solution for creating this optimal margin, which is not naturally occurring in cases of orthodontic space closure, is extruding the canine and intruding the first premolar in order to obtain ideal gingival architecture [32].
6.1.8. Talon Cusp and Geminated Teeth
The chosen articles all used a conservative approach, with gradual cuspal grinding, in some cases performed in multiple sessions to be as conservative as possible and to allow the deposition of reparable dentin for pulpal protection due to the unusual anatomy in these teeth. Both cases were followed up with composite bonding for optimal esthetics [55,56].
6.2. Limitations
There was an evident lack of standardization to measure patient satisfaction in terms of the esthetic outcome of the restorative interventions.
Our inclusion and exclusion criteria meant that some of our retrieved articles had to be excluded due to surgical or endodontic interventions; for example, the anomalies of dens invaginatus, dens evaginatus, supernumerary teeth, as well as short root anomalies.
A nice technique that involves retaining the deciduous teeth to be restored in cases of MLIA was also excluded due to our criteria, and a lot of the literature on anomalous dentition was related to primary dentition.
6.3. Future Considerations
A similar systematic review regarding surgical techniques in the treatment of an anomalous dentition would also provide significant value to the field.
6.4. Clinical Implications
This systematic review can be used as an easy reference for determining the best restorative technique for each anomaly of the dentition.
7. Conclusions
As demonstrated, a comprehensive multi-disciplinary treatment plan, between the orthodontist, restorative dentist, and general dental practitioner, taking into account the individual needs of a patient, is of paramount importance. Pre-visualization of the available options can be achieved with the help of Digital Smile Design, in conjunction with the most effective esthetic parameters available: Bolton analysis, golden proportion, especially in cases of longer incisors, RED proportion, and also the formula used to simplify the tooth size proportions by using the lower anterior incisors as a reference. The predominant demographic of patients looking to correct their anomalous dentition is young people. Therefore, it is even more important to ensure we use as minimally invasive a treatment plan as possible in order to extend the longevity of the restoration, allowing the patient to benefit from the current treatment for a longer period before eventual re-treatment becomes necessary. It is important to remember that ideal orthodontic treatment options may be overestimated by clinicians when compared to laypeople’s smile perception. In cases of patients with both congenitally missing maxillary lateral incisors and a high smile line, that are undergoing orthodontic space closure, extrusion of the canine and intrusion of the first premolar is recommended for optimal gingival margin contouring. At the same time, the patient has shown themselves to be most concerned with the color and shape of the restoration, so always keeping in mind the primary concerns of the patient is advised.
Supplementary Materials
The following are available online at https://www.mdpi.com/article/10.3390/bioengineering12030262/s1, Table S1: PRISMA CHECKLIST.
Author Contributions
T.D. contributed to the design and conception of the work, interpretation of the data and drafting and critically revising the manuscript. C.G. contributed to data acquisition, analysis and interpretation and drafting of the manuscript. C.D. and N.R.M. contributed to the acquisition and analysis of data and critically revised the manuscript. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.
Funding
The research received no external funding.
Acknowledgments
The authors would like to thank Dott. Raffaele Sacerdoti (DDS) who provided insight and expertise that greatly assisted the manuscript. The present manuscript reports results from a systematic review; therefore, no ethical approval was needed.
Conflicts of Interest
The authors declare no conflicts of interest.
References
- Davis, L.G.; Ashworth, P.D.; Spriggs, L.S. Psychological effects of aesthetic dental treatment. J. Dent. 1998, 26, 547–554. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Johal, A.; Huang, Y.; Toledano, S. Hypodontia and its impact on a young person’s quality of life, esthetics, and self-esteem. Am. J. Orthod. Dentofac. Orthop. 2022, 161, 220–227. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Oxford, L. Oxford English Dictionary, s.v. “anomalous (adj.)”. September 2024. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Benito, P.; Trushkowsky, R.; Magid, K.; David, S. Fiber-Reinforced Framework in Conjunction with Porcelain Veneers for the Esthetic Replacement of a Congenitally Missing Maxillary Lateral Incisor: A Case Study. Oper. Dent. 2012, 37, 576–583. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Kokich, V.O.; Kinzer, G.A. Managing Congenitally Missing Lateral Incisors. Part I: Canine Sub-stitution. J. Esthet. Restor. Dent. 2005, 17, 5–10. [Google Scholar]
- German, D.S.; Chu, S.J.; Furlong, M.L.; Patel, A. Simplifying optimal tooth-size calculations and communications between practitioners. Am. J. Orthod. Dentofac. Orthop. 2016, 150, 1051–1055. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Rathi, S.; Dhannawat, P.; Gilani, R.; Vishnani, R. A Multidisciplinary Aesthetic Treatment Approach for Peg Lateral of the Maxillary Incisors. Cureus 2022, 14, e29184. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [PubMed Central]
- Pinho, T.; Maciel, P.; Pollmann, C. Developmental disturbances associated with agenesis of the permanent maxillary lateral incisor. Br. Dent.J. 2009, 207, E25. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wright, J.; Bosio, J.A.; Chou, J.-C.; Jiang, S.S. Maxillary lateral incisor agenesis and its relationship to overall tooth size. J. Prosthet. Dent. 2016, 115, 209–214. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Vieira, W.d.A.; Souza-Silva, B.N.; Bernardino, Í.d.M.; Santana, E.S.; de Matos, F.R.; Bittencourt, M.A.V.; Paranhos, L.R. Maxillary incisorroot morphology in patients with nonsyndromic tooth agenesis: A controlled cross-sectional pilot study. Am. J. Orthod. Dentofac. Orthop. 2020, 157, 212–217. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Santos, D.J.d.S.; Miguel, J.A.M. Association between hypodontia of permanent maxillary lateral incisors and other dental anomalies. Dent. Press. J. Orthod. 2020, 25, 69–78. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Moundouri-Andritsakis, H.; Kourtis, S.G.; Andritsakis, D.P. All-ceramic restorations for complete-mouth rehabilitation in dentinogenesis imperfecta: A case report. Quintessence Int. 2002, 33, 656–660. [Google Scholar] [PubMed]
- Rushworth, B. Oxford Handbook of Clinical Dentistry, 7th ed.; Oxford University Press: Oxford, UK, 2020; pp. 74–75. [Google Scholar]
- Altug-Atac, A.T.; Erdem, D. Prevalence and distribution of dental anomalies in orthodontic patients. Am. J. Orthod. Dentofac. Orthop. 2007, 131, 510–514. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Al-Ani, A.H.; Antoun, J.S.; Thomson, W.M.; Merriman, T.R.; Farella, M. Hypodontia: An Update on Its Etiology, Classification, and Clinical Management. BioMed Res. Int. 2017, 2017, 1–9. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Levitan, M.E.; Himel, V.T. Dens Evaginatus: Literature Review, Pathophysiology, and Comprehensive Treatment Regimen. J. Endod. 2006, 32, 1–9. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hülsmann, M. Dens invaginatus: Aetiology, classification, prevalence, diagnosis, and treatment considerations. Int. Endod. J. 1997, 30, 79–90. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ghassem Ansari, R.W. Atlas of Pediatric Oral and Dental Developmental Anomalies, 1st ed.; Wiley Blackwell: Chichester, UK, 2019; pp. 18–19. [Google Scholar]
- Page, M.J.; McKenzie, J.E.; Bossuyt, P.M.; Boutron, I.; Hoffmann, T.C.; Mulrow, C.D.; Shamseer, L.; Tetzlaff, J.M.; Akl, E.A.; Brennan, S.E.; et al. The PRISMA 2020 statement: An updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews. BMJ 2021, 372, n71. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ouzzani, M.; Hammady, H.; Fedorowicz, Z.; Elmagarmid, A. Rayyan—A web and mobile app for systematic reviews. Syst. Rev. 2016, 5, 210. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sterne, J.A.C.; Hernán, M.A.; Reeves, B.C.; Savović, J.; Berkman, N.D.; Viswanathan, M.; Henry, D.; Altman, D.G.; Ansari, M.T.; Boutron, I.; et al. ROBINS-I: A tool for assessing risk of bias in non-randomised studies of interventions. BMJ 2016, 355, i4919. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Laverty, D.P.; Thomas, M.B. The prosthodontic pathway for patients with anomalies affecting tooth structure. Dent. Update 2016, 43, 356–374. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Nathwani, N.S.; Kelleher, M. Minimally Destructive Management of Amelogenesis Imperfecta and Hypodontia with Bleaching and Bonding. Dent. Update 2010, 37, 170–179. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Büchi, D.; Fehmer, V.; Sailer, I.; Wolleb, K.; Jung, R. Minimally invasive rehabilitation of a patient with amelogenesis imperfecta. Int. J. Esthet. Dent. 2014, 9, 134–145. [Google Scholar] [PubMed]
- Pena, C.E.; Viotti, R.G.; Dias, W.R.; Santucci, E.; Rodrigues, J.A.; Reis, A.F. Esthetic rehabilitation of anterior conoid teeth: Comprehensive approach for improved and predictable results. Eur. J. Esthet. Dent. Off. J. Eur. Acad. Esthet. Dent. 2009, 4, 210–224. [Google Scholar]
- Ford, S.; Ashley, M.P. The dental technician as a member of the hypodontia multidisciplinary team, with practical considerations for anterior restoration design. Br. Dent. J. 2023, 235, 498–502. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Waldman, A.B. Smile Design for the Adolescent Patient—Interdisciplinary Management of Anterior Tooth Size Discrepancies. J. Calif. Dent. Assoc. 2008, 36, 365–372. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lopes-Rocha, L.; Garcez, J.; Tiritan, M.E.; da Silva, L.F.; Pinho, T. Maxillary lateral incisor agenesis and microdontia: Minimally invasive symmetric and asymmetric esthetic rehabilitation. Rev. Port. Estomatol. Med. Dentária E Cir. Maxilofacial. 2022, 63, 41–51. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Brough, E.; Donaldson, A.N.; Naini, F.B. Canine substitution for missing maxillary lateral incisors: The influence of canine morphology, size, and shade on perceptions of smile attractiveness. Am. J. Orthod. Dentofac. Orthop. 2010, 138, 705.e1–705.e9. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Thierens, L.A.M.; Verhoeven, B.; Temmerman, L.; De Pauw, G.A.M. An esthetic evaluation of unilateral canine substitution for a missing maxillary lateral incisor. J. Esthet. Restor. Dent. 2017, 29, 442–449. [Google Scholar]
- Stylianou, A.; Liu, P.; O’Neal, S.J.; Essig, M.E. Restoring Congenitally Missing Maxillary Lateral Incisors Using Zirconia-Based Resin Bonded Prostheses. J. Esthet. Restor. Dent. 2016, 28, 8–17. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Qadri, S.; Parkin, N.A.; Benson, P.E. Space closing versus space opening for bilateral missing upper laterals—Aesthetic judgments of laypeople: A web-based survey. J. Orthod. 2016, 43, 137–146. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Mota, A.; Pinho, T. Esthetic perception of maxillary lateral incisor agenesis treatment by canine mesialization. Int. Orthod. 2016, 14, 95–107. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Pinho, T.; Bellot-Arcís, C.; Montiel-Company, J.M.; Neves, M. Esthetic Assessment of the Effect of Gingival Exposure in the Smile of Patients with Unilateral and Bilateral Maxillary Incisor Agenesis. J. Prosthodont. 2015, 24, 366–372. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Lombardo, L.; D′Ercole, A.; Latini, M.C.; Siciliani, G. Optimal parameters for final position of teeth in space closure in case of a missing upper lateral incisor. Prog. Orthod. 2014, 15, 63. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Alkadhimi, A.; Razaghi, N.; Elder, A.; DiBiase, A.T. Camouflaging the permanent maxillary canine to substitute an absent lateral incisor—Part 1: Assessment and management. Br. Dent. J. 2022, 232, 20–26. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Alkadhimi, A.; Razaghi, N.; Elder, A.; DiBiase, A.T. Camouflaging the permanent maxillary canine to substitute an absent lateral incisor—Part 2: Challenges and solutions. Br. Dent. J. 2022, 232, 84–91. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Rayner, W.J.; Barber, S.K.; Spencer, R.J. The effect of canine characteristics and symmetry on perceived smile attractiveness when canine teeth are substituted for lateral incisors. J. Orthod. 2015, 42, 22–32. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Araújo, E.A.; Oliveira, D.D.; Araújo, M.T. Diagnostic protocol in cases of congenitally missing maxillary lateral incisors. World J. Orthod. 2006, 7, 376–388. [Google Scholar]
- Ulhaq, A. Dental Factors Influencing Treatment Choice For Maxillary Lateral Incisor Agenesis: A Retrospective Study. Eur. J. Prosthodont. Restor. Dent. 2019, 27, 182–188. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Priest, G. The treatment dilemma of missing maxillary lateral incisors-Part I: Canine substitution and resin-bonded fixed dental prostheses. J. Esthet. Restor. Dent. 2019, 31, 311–318. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- De-Marchi, L.M.; Pini NI, P.; Ramos, A.L.; Pascotto, R.C. Smile attractiveness of patients treated for congenitally missing maxillary lateral incisors as rated by dentists, laypersons, and the patients themselves. J. Prosthet. Dent. 2014, 112, 540–546. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Pini, N.P.; De-Marchi, L.M.; Gribel, B.F.; Pascotto, R.C. Digital Analysis of Anterior Dental Esthetic Parameters in Patients with Bilateral Maxillary Lateral Incisor Agenesis. J. Esthet. Restor. Dent. 2013, 25, 189–200. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kinzer, G.A.; Kokich, V.O., Jr. Managing Congenitally Missing Lateral Incisors. Part II: Tooth-Supported Restorations. J. Esthet. Restor. Dent. Off. Publ. Am. Acad. Esthet. Dent. 2005, 17, 76–84. [Google Scholar]
- Dolan, S.; Calvert, G.; Crane, L.; Savarrio, L.; PAshley, M. Restorative dentistry clinical decision-making for hypodontia: Peg and missing lateral incisor teeth. Br. Dent. J. 2023, 235, 471–476. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Omeish, N.; Nassif, A.; Feghali, S.; Vi-Fane, B.; Bosco, J. Esthetic and functional rehabilitation of peg-shaped maxillary lateral incisors: Practical recommendations. Clin. Case Rep. 2022, 10, e05507. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Izgi, A.D.; Ayna, E. Direct restorative treatment of peg-shaped maxillary lateral incisors with resin composite: A clinical report. J. Prosthet. Dent. 2005, 93, 526–529. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Saatwika, L.; Anuradha, B.; Mary, P.G.; Subbiya, A. Esthetic correction of peg laterals—A case report. Eur. J. Mol. Clin. Med. 2020, 7, 2515–8260. [Google Scholar]
- Fernandes da Cunha, L.; Procopiak Gugelmin, B.; Gaião, U.; Castiglia Gonzaga, C.; Correr, G.M. Tooth movement with elastic separators before ceramic veneer treatment: Rearranging asymmetric diastemas by managing the horizontal distance. Quintessence Int. 2018, 49, 133–137. [Google Scholar]
- Irmaleny, I.; Hidayat, O.T.; Handayani, R.A.P. Componeer as an aesthetic treatment option for anterior teeth: A case report. BMC Oral Health 2024, 24, 367. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bayindir, Y.Z.; Zorba, Y.O.; Barutcugil, C. Direct Laminate Veneers with Resin Composites: Two Case Reports with Five-Year Follow-ups. J. Contemp. Dent. Pract. 2010, 11, 56–62. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Scarpelli, A.C.; Reboucas, A.P.S.; Compart, T.; Novaes-Júnior, J.B.; Paiva, S.M.; Pordeus, I.A. Seven-year follow-up of esthetic alternative for the restoration of peg-shaped incisors: A case study of identical twins. Gen. Dent. 2008, 56, 74–77. [Google Scholar]
- Ittipuriphat, I.; Leevailoj, C. Anterior Space Management: Interdisciplinary Concepts. J. Esthet. Restor. Dent. 2013, 25, 16–30. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Thomas, M.; Reddy, R.; Reddy, B.J. Perception differences of altered dental esthetics by dental professionals and laypersons. Indian J. Dent. Res. 2011, 22, 242. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Agou, S.H.; Basri, A.A.; Mudhaffer, S.M.; Altarazi, A.T.; A Elhussein, M.; Imam, A.Y. Dimensions of Maxillary Lateral Incisor on the Esthetic Perception of Smile: A Comparative Study of Dental Professionals and the General Population. J. Contemp. Dent. Pract. 2020, 21, 992–996. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Cracel-Nogueira, F.; Pinho, T. Assessment of the perception of smile esthetics by laypersons, dental students and dental practitioners. Int. Orthod. 2013, 11, 432–444, (English, French). [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Rosa, M.; Olimpo, A.; Fastuca, R.; Caprioglio, A. Perceptions of dental professionals and laypeople to altered dental esthetics in cases with congenitally missing maxillary lateral incisors. Prog. Orthod. 2013, 14, 34. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Martinez Florez, D.; Rinchuse, D.; Zullo, T. Influence of maxillary lateral incisor width ratio on perception of smile esthetics among orthodontists and laypersons. J. Esthet. Restor. Dent. 2021, 33, 510–515. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bukhary SM, N.; Gill, D.S.; Tredwin, C.J.; Moles, D.R. The influence of varying maxillary lateral incisor dimensions on perceived smile aesthetics. Br. Dent. J. 2007, 203, 687–693. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Gupta, S.P.; Rauniyar, S. Orthodontic Space Closure of a Missing Maxillary Lateral Incisor Followed by Canine Lateralization. Case Rep. Dent. 2020, 2020, 1–7. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ward, D.H. A Study of Dentists’ Preferred Maxillary Anterior Tooth Width Proportions: Comparing the Recurring Esthetic Dental Proportion to Other Mathematical and Naturally Occurring Proportions. J. Esthet. Restor. Dent. 2007, 19, 324–339. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Yazıcıoğlu, O.; Ulukapı, H. Management of a Facial Talon Cusp on a Maxillary Permanent Central Incisor: A Case Report and Review of the Literature. J. Esthet. Restor. Dent. 2014, 26, 374–381. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kokich, V.O.; Kokich, V.G.; Kiyak, H.A. Perceptions of dental professionals and laypersons to altered dental esthetics: Asymmetric and symmetric situations. Am. J. Orthod. Dentofac. Orthop. 2006, 130, 141–151. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sengun, A.; Ozer, F. Restoring function and esthetics in a patient with amelogenesis imperfecta: A case report. Quintessence Int. 2002, 33, 199–204. [Google Scholar] [PubMed]
- Sener, S.; Unlu, N.; Basciftci, F.A.; Bozdag, G. Bilateral geminated teeth with talon cusps: A case report. Eur. J. Dent. 2012, 06, 440–444. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kelleher, M. Dental Bleaching. Quintessentials of Dental Practice. In Operative Dentistry, 1st ed.; Quintessence Publishing Co., Ltd.: Batavia, IL, USA, 2007; Volume 6, pp. 40–60. [Google Scholar]
- Seow, W.K. Clinical diagnosis and management strategies of amelogenesis imperfectavariants. Pediatr. Dent. 1993, 15, 384–393. [Google Scholar] [PubMed]
- Magne, P. Bonded Porcelain Restorations in the Anterior Dentition A Biomimetic Approach; Quintessence Publishing Company: Berlin, Germany, 2002. [Google Scholar]
- Magne, P.; Magne, M. Use of additive waxup and direct intraoral mock-up for enamel preservation with porcelain laminate veneers. Eur. J. Esthet. Dent. 2006, 1, 10–19. [Google Scholar] [PubMed]
- Balasubramaniam, G.R. Predictability of resin bonded bridges—A systematic review. Br. Dent. J. 2017, 222, 849–858. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Shillingburg, H.T. Fundamentals of Fixed Prosthodontics. Learning 1997, 10, 40. [Google Scholar]
- Proffit, W.R. Contemporary Orthodontics, 6th ed.; Elsevier: Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 2007; pp. 564–570. [Google Scholar]
- Lang, N. Lindhe’s Clinical Periodontology and Implant Dentistry; John Wiley & Sons: Hoboken, NJ, USA, 2021. [Google Scholar]
- Rosenstiel, S.F.; Ward, D.H.; Rashid, R.G. Dentists’ preferences of anterior tooth proportion--a web-based study. J. Prosthodont. 2000, 9, 123–136. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- McDonald, S.; Arkutu, N.; Malik, K.; Gadhia, K.; McKaig, S. Managing the paediatric patient with amelogenesis imperfecta. Br. Dent. J. 2012, 212, 425–428. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Dhaliwal, H.; McKaig, S. Dentinogenesis imperfecta--clinical presentation and management. Dent. Update. 2010, 37, 364–366, 369–371. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Yip, H.K.; Smales, R.J. Oral rehabilitation of young adults with amelogenesis imperfecta. Int. J. Prosthodont. 2003, 16, 345–349. [Google Scholar] [PubMed]
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content. |
© 2025 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).

