Clinical longevity of Deep Margin Elevation versus Crown Lengthening: A Systematic Review

Authors

  • Waleed Asiri Author
  • Mohammed Hamad Al Thaiban Author
  • Nasser Salem Alsallum Author
  • Majed Ahmad Magbool Author
  • Meshari Hussain Mohammed AlMuammuar Author
  • Ahmed Mahdi Balharath Author
  • Hamed Alghamdi Author
  • Meshal Hussain Alhammami Author
  • Mahdi Dhafer Alyami Author

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.53555/AJBR.v28i4S.8842

Keywords:

Crown Lengthening, Deep Margin Elevation, Gingival Health, Restoration Survival, Subgingival Margins

Abstract

The management of deep subgingival tooth margins is a common challenge in restorative dentistry. Two widely used techniques, Deep Margin Elevation (DME) and Crown Lengthening (CL), are employed to address this issue by increasing the amount of tooth structure above the gumline to ensure proper crown placement. While both techniques are effective, a direct comparison of their clinical longevity, success rates, and complications is limited.

Objective : This systematic review aims to compare the clinical outcomes, longevity, and complications of DME and CL to assess their effectiveness in restorative dentistry.

Methods: A comprehensive search of electronic databases was conducted to identify randomized controlled trials (RCTs), prospective controlled studies, and longitudinal studies that evaluated DME and CL for deep subgingival margins. Key outcomes assessed included clinical attachment levels (CAL), probing depths (PD), bleeding on probing (BOP), gingival recession, and long-term restoration survival.

Results: A total of 8 studies were included in the review. Both DME and CL demonstrated high clinical success rates, with similar outcomes in terms of restoration survival and gingival health. However, DME was associated with higher BOP, suggesting a slightly increased risk of gingival inflammation compared to CL. CL, particularly the two-stage approach, showed benefits in terms of keratinized tissue width (KTW) and patient satisfaction. Long-term studies have demonstrated favorable results for DME in posterior restorations, with low failure rates over 12 years.

Conclusion: Both DME and CL are effective techniques for managing deep subgingival margins. While DME offers a more conservative and less invasive approach, CL is preferable in cases requiring extensive gingival recontouring or where esthetics are a priority. Further research is needed to compare these techniques directly over more extended follow-up periods to determine their long-term effectiveness and complications.

Author Biographies

  • Waleed Asiri

    Associate Professor, Department of Restorative Dentistry, Faculty of Dentistry, Najran University, Saudi Arabia

  • Mohammed Hamad Al Thaiban

    General Practitioner, Almeswak Clinics, Najran, Saudi Arabia

  • Nasser Salem Alsallum

    General practitioner, Basmalah Alnoor Dental Center, Najran, Saudi Arabia

  • Majed Ahmad Magbool

    Dental Observership, Najran Specialty Dental Center, Najran, Saudi Arabia

  • Meshari Hussain Mohammed AlMuammuar

    Dental Intern, Faculty of Dentistry, Najran University, Najran, Saudi Arabia

  • Ahmed Mahdi Balharath

    Dental student, Faculty of Dentistry, Najran University, Najran, Saudi Arabia

  • Hamed Alghamdi

    Dental student, Faculty of Dentistry, Najran University, Najran, Saudi Arabia

  • Meshal Hussain Alhammami

    Dental Intern, Faculty of Dentistry, Najran University, Najran, Saudi Arabia

  • Mahdi Dhafer Alyami

    Dental Intern, Faculty of Dentistry, Najran University, Najran, Saudi Arabia

Downloads

Published

2025-11-28

Issue

Section

Research Article

How to Cite

Clinical longevity of Deep Margin Elevation versus Crown Lengthening: A Systematic Review. (2025). African Journal of Biomedical Research, 28(4S), 583-591. https://doi.org/10.53555/AJBR.v28i4S.8842

Most read articles by the same author(s)