Treatment of unilateral or bilateral maxillary lateral incisor agenesis is challenging, time-consuming, expensive, and requires careful treatment planning, predictability, and esthetics. This review aimed to identify differences in esthetic perception among orthodontists, general dentists, differentiated dentists, and laypersons, which may interfere with treatment options. EBSCO, PubMed, ScienceDirect, Cochrane Library databases, and Google Scholar were searched using keyword pairing and a Boolean expression, “(congenitally missing OR agenesis OR hypodontia) AND (maxillary lateral incisors) AND (esthetic perception OR smile) AND (laypersons OR dental professional OR general dentist OR orthodontists).” Reviews and case studies were excluded. A total of 13 studies were selected for qualitative analysis (adapted ROBINS-I) and 11 were selected for meta-analysis (p < 0.05) after being sub-grouped into “Opening vs. Closure” and “No remodeling vs. Dental remodeling vs. Dental and gingival remodeling” groups. A meta-analysis evaluated the magnitude of the difference between groups based on differences in means and effect sizes (α = 0.05; 95% CI; Z-value 1.96), revealing that the esthetic perception of maxillary lateral incisor agenesis treatment remains controversial even among professionals. Gingival remodeling was not valued compared to isolated dental remodeling. Studies lack rigorously comparable methodologies. Discussion with the patient is pertinent in doubtful situations, as the best treatment option remains unclear, and overtreatment should be avoided.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.