-
Clinical and Experimental Dental... Apr 2023The objective of this review is to assess the available literature systematically related to the effect of silver diamine fluoride (SDF) for the management of occlusal...
OBJECTIVES
The objective of this review is to assess the available literature systematically related to the effect of silver diamine fluoride (SDF) for the management of occlusal and root carious lesions in permanent teeth regardless of age. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This systematic review was conducted according to the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions and Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analyses statement. A literature search was performed using PubMed/MEDLINE, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Web of Science, DOAJ, and Open Gray with no language restrictions up to December 2022. Three reviewers critically assessed the studies for eligibility. Any disputes between the reviewers were handled by a fourth independent reviewer. The quality assessment and data extraction of the studies were performed.
RESULTS
A total of 2176 studies were screened. The titles and abstracts of the studies were then reviewed (n = 346), and 52 studies met the search criteria. Following the full-text review, 11 studies investigated the effect of SDF against other treatments such as chlorhexidine, sodium fluoride, ammonium bifluoride, tricalcium silicate paste, casein phosphopeptide amorphous calcium phosphate, glass ionomer cement (GIC) combined with fluoride varnish, resin-modified GIC, and atraumatic restorative treatment were assessed.
CONCLUSIONS
Within the limitations of this review, the use of SDF is promising with high preventative fractions in permanent teeth of children and older populations when compared to other topical applications such as dental varnish containing sodium fluoride.
Topics: Child; Humans; Dental Atraumatic Restorative Treatment; Dental Caries; Fluorides, Topical; Sodium Fluoride
PubMed: 36823765
DOI: 10.1002/cre2.716 -
Dental Materials : Official Publication... Mar 2023The aims of this study were to systematically review the literature and statistically analyze the effectiveness of different cleaning methods on the bond strength of... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
OBJECTIVES
The aims of this study were to systematically review the literature and statistically analyze the effectiveness of different cleaning methods on the bond strength of resin cement to zirconia in short- and long-term aging conditions.
DATA/SOURCES
The literature was electronically searched in PubMed (MEDLINE), EMBASE, Wiley, Scopus, and Open Access Theses and Dissertations databases to select relevant articles that evaluated the bond strength between contaminated zirconia and resin cements. A manual search was performed by scanning the reference lists of included studies.
STUDY SELECTION
All articles were published online before April 2022 and in English. Meta-analyses were conducted using random effects models to calculate standardized mean differences (SMD) between uncontaminated zirconia and various cleaning methods in two aging conditions (short- and long-term). Statistical heterogeneity was assessed using I-square statistics. The risk of bias of all included studies was assessed. All statistical analyses were conducted using STATA (StataCorp, College Station, Texas).
RESULTS
Of the 1181 studies, 25 studies met the inclusion criteria for qualitative analyses. In short-term aging condition, cleaning contaminated zirconia with water, alcohol, or acid etching reported significantly lower bond strength than uncontaminated zirconia. For long-term aging condition, cleaning contaminated zirconia with water, cleaning agents, alcohol, or acid etching reported significantly lower bond strength than uncontaminated zirconia. Alumina air-abrasion or cleaning with sodium hypochlorite were comparable to uncontaminated zirconia for both short- and long-term aging conditions.
CONCLUSIONS
This meta-analysis appeared to indicate that the cleaning methods of contaminated zirconia restoration have an effect on zirconia bonding.
Topics: Humans; Dental Bonding; Surface Properties; Resin Cements; Zirconium; Water; Materials Testing; Dental Stress Analysis
PubMed: 36754733
DOI: 10.1016/j.dental.2023.01.009 -
The Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry Apr 2016No consensus has been reached on which retention system, cement- or screw-retained, is best to avoid bone loss around the implant of a fixed implant-supported... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
STATEMENT OF PROBLEM
No consensus has been reached on which retention system, cement- or screw-retained, is best to avoid bone loss around the implant of a fixed implant-supported restoration.
PURPOSE
The purpose of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to compare cement- and screw-retained retention systems in fixed implant-supported restorations in terms of marginal bone loss, implant survival, and prosthetic complications.
MATERIAL AND METHODS
A comprehensive search of studies published from January 1995 to March 2015 and listed in the PubMed/MEDLINE, Embase, Scopus and the Cochrane Library databases was performed in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) statement. The meta-analysis was based on the Mantel-Haenszel and inverse variance methods. Marginal bone loss was the continuous outcome measure evaluated by mean difference (MD), and implant survival and prosthetic complications were the dichotomous outcome measures evaluated by risk ratio (RR), both with corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CI).
RESULTS
The 20 studies selected for review evaluated 2139 participants, whose mean age was 47.14 years and who had received 8989 dental implants. The mean follow-up was 65.4 months (range: 12-180 months). Results of the MD for marginal bone loss showed statistically significant differences in favor of the cement-retained prosthesis (P =.04; MD: -0.19; CI: -0.37 to -0.01). The implant survival rate was higher for the cement-retained prosthesis (P =.01; RR: 0.49; CI: 0.28 to 0.85), and the prosthetic complication rate was higher for the screw-retained prosthesis (P =.04; RR: 0.52; CI: 0.28 to 0.98). Additional analysis of the mean plaque index did not show differences between retention systems (P=.58; MD: 0.13; CI: -0.32 to 0.57).
CONCLUSIONS
The current meta-analysis indicated that cement-retained, fixed implant-supported restorations showed less marginal bone loss than screw-retained, fixed implant-supported restorations during the follow-up period, which ranged from 12 to 180 months. However, the small difference between the mean values may not show clinical significance. The rates of prosthetic complication and implant survival also compared favorably with cement-retained prostheses.
Topics: Alveolar Bone Loss; Bone Screws; Cementation; Dental Cements; Dental Implants; Dental Prosthesis Retention; Dental Prosthesis, Implant-Supported; Dental Restoration Failure; Humans
PubMed: 26589441
DOI: 10.1016/j.prosdent.2015.08.026 -
International Journal of Nanomedicine 2022Non-metallic nanomaterials do not stain enamel or dentin. Most have better biocompatibility than metallic nanomaterials do for management of dental caries. (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Non-metallic nanomaterials do not stain enamel or dentin. Most have better biocompatibility than metallic nanomaterials do for management of dental caries.
OBJECTIVE
The objective of this study is to review the types, properties and potential uses of non-metallic nanomaterials systematically for managing dental caries.
METHODS
Two researchers independently performed a literature search of publications in English using PubMed, Scopus and Web of Science. The keywords used were (nanoparticles OR nanocomposites OR nanomaterials) AND (caries OR tooth decay). They screened the titles and abstracts to identify potentially eligible publications of original research reporting non-metallic nanomaterials for caries management. Then, they retrieved and studied the full text of the identified publications for inclusion in this study.
RESULTS
Out of 2497 resulting publications, this study included 75 of those. The non-metallic nanomaterials used in these publications were categorized as biological organic nanomaterials (n=45), synthetic organic nanomaterials (n=15), carbon-based nanomaterials (n=13) and selenium nanomaterials (n=2). They inhibited bacteria growth and/or promoted remineralization. They could be incorporated in topical agents (29/75, 39%), dental adhesives (11/75, 15%), restorative fillers (4/75, 5%), dental sealant (3/75, 4%), oral drugs (3/75, 4%), toothpastes (2/75, 3%) and functional candies (1/75, 1%). Other publications (22/75, 29%) do not mention specific applications. However, most publications (67/75, 89%) were in vitro studies. Six publications (6/75, 8%) were animal studies, and only two publications (2/75, 3%) were clinical studies.
CONCLUSION
The literature showed non-metallic nanomaterials have antibacterial and/or remineralising properties. The most common type of non-metallic nanomaterials for caries management is organic nanomaterials. Non-metallic nanomaterials can be incorporated into dental sealants, toothpaste, dental adhesives, topical agents and even candies and drugs. However, the majority of the publications are in vitro studies, and only two publications are clinical studies.
Topics: Humans; Dental Caries; Dental Cements
PubMed: 36474525
DOI: 10.2147/IJN.S389038 -
Journal of Dentistry Jun 2021A better understanding of the microstructure and mechanical properties of enamel and dentine may enable practitioners to apply the current adhesive dentistry protocols... (Review)
Review
OBJECTIVES
A better understanding of the microstructure and mechanical properties of enamel and dentine may enable practitioners to apply the current adhesive dentistry protocols to clinical cases involving dentine disorders (dentinogenesis imperfecta or dentine dysplasia).
DATA/SOURCES
Publications (up to June 2020) investigating the microstructure of dentine disorders were browsed in a systematic search using the PubMed/Medline, Embase and Cochrane Library electronic databases. Two authors independently selected the studies, extracted the data in accordance with the PRISMA statement, and assessed the risk of bias with the Critical Appraisal Checklist. A Mann-Whitney U test was computed to compare tissues damage related to the two dentine disorders of interest.
STUDY SELECTION
From an initial total of 642 studies, only 37 (n = 164 teeth) were included in the present analysis, among which 18 investigating enamel (n = 70 teeth), 15 the dentine-enamel junction (n = 62 teeth), and 35 dentine (n = 156 teeth). Dentine is damaged in cases of dentinogenesis imperfecta and osteogenesis imperfecta (p = 2.55E-21 and p = 3.99E-21, respectively). These studies highlight a reduction in mineral density, hardness, modulus of elasticity and abnormal microstructure in dentine disorders. The majority of studies report an altered dentine-enamel junction in dentinogenesis imperfecta and in osteogenesis imperfecta (p = 6.26E-09 and p = 0.001, respectively). Interestingly, enamel is also affected in cases of dentinogenesis imperfecta (p = 0.0013), unlike to osteogenesis imperfecta (p = 0.056).
CONCLUSIONS
Taking into account all these observations, only a few clinical principles may be favoured in the case of adhesive cementation: (i) to preserve the residual enamel to enhance bonding, (ii) to sandblast the tooth surfaces to increase roughness, (iii) to choose a universal adhesive and reinforce enamel and dentine by means of infiltrant resins. As these recommendations are mostly based on in vitro studies, future in vivo studies should be conducted to confirm these hypotheses.
Topics: Dental Cements; Dental Enamel; Dentin; Hardness; Tooth
PubMed: 33798638
DOI: 10.1016/j.jdent.2021.103654 -
Operative Dentistry Jan 2021The literature reviewed suggests that airborne particle abrasion has no negative effects on the bond strength of resin-based materials to dentin and that a positive... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
CLINICAL RELEVANCE
The literature reviewed suggests that airborne particle abrasion has no negative effects on the bond strength of resin-based materials to dentin and that a positive influence on dentin bond strength was only achieved in specific air-abrasion conditions.
SUMMARY
In this systematic review the authors investigated how airborne-particle abrasion (APA) using aluminum oxide affects the bond strength of resin-based materials to dentin. The search was performed in three databases. In vitro studies (Type of study) comparing the bond strength of resin-based materials (Outcome) to air-abraded (Intervention) compared with non-air-abraded (Comparison) human dentin (Population) were included (the PICOT elements are given parenthetically). From 5437 unique articles, 65 were read in full, 33 were included in the qualitative synthesis, and 32 were included in the meta-analysis. Methodologic quality and risk of bias were assessed. Comparisons were performed between air-abraded and control dentin groups by adopting a random-effects model (α=0.05). Additional analyses were carried out for the different parameters used in APA: type of surface treatment in the control group, particle size, air pressure, and APA duration. The bond strength to air-abraded dentin was favored only when the control surface was treated with a hand excavator. For particle size, APA was favored when the particle size was >30 μm and the controls were no treatment or hand excavator or when the particle size was ≤30 μm and the control was bur. In addition, the results favored air-abraded groups only when the pressure was > 5 bar and bur was used in the control group. No significant differences were observed for duration of APA. No comparison on bond strength considering the presence of aging conditions was possible in the included studies due to the low number of studies that aged the specimens. In conclusion, APA had no negative effects on the bond strength of resin-based materials to dentin and was able to improve the dentin bond strength only when the particle size was > 30 μm and air pressure was > 5 bar. PROSPERO registration protocol: CRD42018096128.
Topics: Aged; Aluminum Oxide; Composite Resins; Dental Bonding; Dentin; Humans; Materials Testing; Resin Cements; Shear Strength; Surface Properties
PubMed: 32926155
DOI: 10.2341/19-216-L -
Supportive Care in Cancer : Official... May 2024This study is to conduct a comprehensive scoping review to map scientific evidence and clarify concepts regarding the commonly recommended preventive and restorative... (Review)
Review
PURPOSE
This study is to conduct a comprehensive scoping review to map scientific evidence and clarify concepts regarding the commonly recommended preventive and restorative dental treatments for patients diagnosed with head and neck cancer (HNC) and subjected to radiotherapy.
MATERIAL AND METHODS
This systematic scoping review was performed under the PRISMA-ScR guidelines. The study's experimental design was registered in the Open Science Framework. In vitro studies that evaluated preventive and restorative dental treatment over 50 Gy radiation doses were included. The search was conducted in November 2023 in five electronic databases (PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, and Embase) without language or date restriction. A search strategy was applied based on keywords, MeSh terms, or synonyms. A descriptive analysis was conducted.
RESULTS
A total of 49 studies, out of 3679 original articles identified, were included and reviewed. Of the included studies, three evaluated saliva stimulants and 35 evaluated fluoride-based preventive materials: gel (n = 18) toothpaste (n = 11) mouth rinse (n = 8) and varnish (n = 5) while 14 evaluated restorative materials: resin composite (n = 12) glass ionomer cement (n = 6) and amalgam (n = 1) Of those studies, 36 were clinical trials and 13 were in vitro studies.
CONCLUSION
Fluoride gel was the most frequently recommended preventive material for preventing radiation caries with supportive clinical evidence. Resin composite and glass ionomer were the most frequently used restorative materials, respectively. However, there is not yet clinical evidence to support the use of resin composite in irradiated teeth.
Topics: Humans; Dental Caries; Head and Neck Neoplasms; Dental Restoration, Permanent
PubMed: 38702458
DOI: 10.1007/s00520-024-08522-2 -
Experimental methodologies to evaluate the masking ability of dental materials: A systematic review.Journal of Esthetic and Restorative... Dec 2021To conduct a systematic review on the masking ability of discolored substrates, analyzing the capacity and quality of the response produced by the different... (Review)
Review
OBJECTIVE
To conduct a systematic review on the masking ability of discolored substrates, analyzing the capacity and quality of the response produced by the different methodologies and techniques applied to overcome this clinical challenge.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
The study followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) statement. The electronic search was conducted in MEDLINE/PubMed, Scopus and Web of Science databases, without date restriction. In vitro studies, written in English, applying different methodologies to evaluate masking ability were included. The variables of interest were: type, color and thickness of the restorative and/or cement material; use of pigments in the restorative material and/or cement; color of the substrate; and background color used for the evaluations.
RESULTS
Database search retrieved 307 eligible papers with a final inclusion of 47 published papers. Approximately 98% of the studies used ΔE, 36% used TP, and only 6% used CR to evaluate the masking ability of restorative materials.
CONCLUSIONS
The most appropriate methodology to evaluate the masking ability is using color difference equations (ΔE) associated with the perceptibility and acceptability thresholds.
CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE
As different methodologies have been used to evaluate the masking ability of esthetic restorative materials on colored substrates, there is an urgent need to reach a consensus and propose a method, which is suggested by the present systematic review.
Topics: Ceramics; Color; Dental Materials; Dental Porcelain; Materials Testing
PubMed: 34085377
DOI: 10.1111/jerd.12791 -
Journal of Dental Research Jun 2016For restoring cavitated dental lesions, whether carious or not, a large number of material combinations are available. We aimed to systematically review and synthesize... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
For restoring cavitated dental lesions, whether carious or not, a large number of material combinations are available. We aimed to systematically review and synthesize data of comparative dental restorative trials. A systematic review was performed. Randomized controlled trials published between 2005 and 2015 were included that compared the survival of ≥2 restorative and/or adhesive materials (i.e., no need for restorative reintervention). Pairwise and Bayesian network meta-analyses were performed, with separate evaluations for cervical cavitated lesions and load-bearing posterior cavitated lesions in permanent and primary teeth. A total of 11,070 restorations (5,330 cervical, 5,740 load bearing) had been placed in 3,633 patients in the included trials. Thirty-six trials investigated restoration of cervical lesions (all in permanent teeth) and 36 of load-bearing lesions (8 in primary and 28 in permanent teeth). Resin-modified glass ionomer cements had the highest chance of survival in cervical cavitated lesions; composites or compomers placed via 2-step self-etch and 3-step etch-and-rinse adhesives were ranked next. Restorations placed with 2-step etch-and-rinse or 1-step self-etch adhesives performed worst. For load-bearing restorations, conventional composites had the highest probability of survival, while siloranes were found least suitable. Ambiguity remains regarding which adhesive strategy to use in load-bearing cavitated lesions. Most studies showed high risk of bias, and several comparisons were prone for publication bias. If prioritized for survival, resin-modified glass ionomer cements might be recommended to restore cervical lesions. For load-bearing ones, conventional or bulk fill composites seem most suitable. The available evidence is quantitatively and qualitatively insufficient for further recommendations, especially with regard to adhesive strategies in posterior load-bearing situations. Moreover, different material classifications might yield different findings on the same materials. Future trials should aim for sufficient power, longer follow-up times, and high internal validity to prove or refute differences between certain material combinations. An agreed material classification for future syntheses is desirable.
Topics: Acid Etching, Dental; Bayes Theorem; Composite Resins; Dental Cavity Preparation; Dental Materials; Dental Restoration Failure; Dental Restoration, Permanent; Dentin-Bonding Agents; Evidence-Based Dentistry; Glass Ionomer Cements; Humans
PubMed: 26912220
DOI: 10.1177/0022034516631285 -
Journal of Indian Prosthodontic Society 2021This systematic review with meta-analysis aimed to evaluate the effect of the laser treatment on bond strength between Y-TZP and the resin cement or with the veneering... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
AIM
This systematic review with meta-analysis aimed to evaluate the effect of the laser treatment on bond strength between Y-TZP and the resin cement or with the veneering ceramic, and the effect on the alteration of the Y-TZP surface roughness.
SETTINGS AND DESIGN
Systematic review and meta analysis following PROSPERO guidelines.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
A comprehensive review was performed up to September 2020 on four databases (PubMed/MEDLINE, Embase, Scopus, and Cochrane Library), using the combination of keywords: "laser AND zirconia AND surface treatment AND bond strength".
STATISTICAL ANALYSIS USED
The meta-analysis was based on the Mantel-Haenszel and inverse variance methods. The continuous outcome was evaluated by mean difference and the corresponding 95% confidence intervals.
RESULTS
A total of 37 studies were identified for the inclusion of data, with only in vitro studies. The types of laser reported in the studies were: Er:YAG, Nd:YAG, Er,Cr:YSGG, CO2, Femtosecond, and Yb lasers. A random-effect model found statistically significant differences between lasers and control groups of Y-TZP (P < 0.00001; MD: 3.08; 95% CI: 2.58 to 3.58). Only the bond strength with the Er:YAG laser did not present statistical difference (P = 0.51; MD: 0.22; 95% CI: -0.44-0.88). In another analysis, a random-effect model found a statistically significant difference between the laser and control groups on surface roughness (P < 0.00001; MD: 0.96; 95% CI: 0.86 to 1.06).
CONCLUSIONS
Laser irradiation is capable to improve the Y-TZP surface roughness and the bond strength of zirconia with resin cement and veneering ceramics. However, there is a lack of laser protocol for the zirconia surface, a fact that makes a simple and direct comparison difficult.
Topics: Ceramics; Humans; Lasers, Solid-State; Materials Testing; Microscopy, Electron, Scanning; Resin Cements; Shear Strength; Surface Properties; Yttrium; Zirconium
PubMed: 33938862
DOI: 10.4103/jips.jips_590_20