-
Journal of Periodontology Feb 2015Management of gingival recession defects, a common periodontal condition, using root coverage procedures is an important aspect of periodontal regenerative therapy. The...
BACKGROUND
Management of gingival recession defects, a common periodontal condition, using root coverage procedures is an important aspect of periodontal regenerative therapy. The goal of the periodontal soft tissue root coverage procedures group was to develop a consensus report based on the accompanying systematic review of root coverage procedures, including priorities for future research and identification of the best evidence available to manage different clinical scenarios.
METHODS
The group reviewed and discussed the accompanying systematic review, which covered treatment of single-tooth recession defects, multiple-tooth recession defects, and additional focused questions on relevant clinical topics. The consensus group members submitted additional material for consideration by the group in advance and at the time of the meeting. The group also identified priorities for future research.
RESULTS
All reviewed root coverage procedures provide significant reduction in recession depth, especially for Miller Class I and II recession defects. Subepithelial connective tissue graft (SCTG) procedures provide the best root coverage outcomes. Acellular dermal matrix graft (ADMG) or enamel matrix derivative (EMD) in conjunction with a coronally advanced flap (CAF) can serve as alternatives to autogenous donor tissue. Additional research is needed to do the following: 1) assess the treatment outcomes for multiple-tooth recession defects, oral sites other than maxillary canine and premolar teeth, and Miller Class III and IV defects; 2) assess the role of patient- and site-specific factors on procedure outcomes; and 3) obtain evidence on patient-reported outcomes.
CONCLUSIONS
Predictable root coverage is possible for single-tooth and multiple-tooth recession defects, with SCTG procedures providing the best root coverage outcomes. Alternatives to SCTG are supported by evidence of varying strength. Additional research is needed on treatment outcomes for specific oral sites. Clinical Recommendation: For Miller Class I and II single-tooth recession defects, SCTG procedures provide the best outcomes, whereas ADMG or EMD in conjunction with CAF may be used as an alternative.
Topics: Acellular Dermis; Autografts; Bicuspid; Connective Tissue; Cuspid; Dental Enamel Proteins; Gingiva; Gingival Recession; Guided Tissue Regeneration, Periodontal; Humans; Patient Satisfaction; Skin Transplantation; Surgical Flaps; Tooth Root
PubMed: 25315018
DOI: 10.1902/jop.2015.140376 -
International Endodontic Journal Apr 2022Consensus on the treatment of choice for complicated crown fractures of teeth is limited. Recent guidance recommends vital-pulp-therapy; however, the preferred type is... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Consensus on the treatment of choice for complicated crown fractures of teeth is limited. Recent guidance recommends vital-pulp-therapy; however, the preferred type is not specified. Higher success rates for pulpotomy compared to pulp-capping have been documented, which suggests pulpotomy may be a preferable option for complicated crown-fractures.
OBJECTIVES
The purpose of this systematic review was to determine the success rate of pulpotomy (partial and complete) on teeth that suffered complicated crown fractures.
PARTICIPANTS
patients who have suffered a complicated crown fracture to an anterior permanent tooth.
INTERVENTION
pulpotomy (partial or complete). Comparator: pulp-capping or root canal treatment.
OUTCOME
combined clinical and radiographic success at or after 12 months.
METHODS
A systematic literature using key search terms was conducted using PubMed, Web of Science and Cochrane-Central-Register-of-Controlled-Trials (CENTRAL) as well as a grey literature search from inception to May 2021 and without language restricted to English. Strict inclusion criteria were applied. A standardized tool with defined criteria to assess the risk of bias in each study was used. For non-randomized comparative trials, the Robins-I tool was used while the Newcastle-Ottawa scale was used for non-comparative non-randomized studies.
RESULTS
Seven retrospective clinical studies were included. The studies reported high success rates for pulpotomy with overall success ranges for partial or complete pulpotomy ranging from 75% to 96%. One study compared the success rates of pulpotomy to an alternative treatment option pulp capping (90.9% vs. 67%, respectively). Due to the lack of homogeneity in the included studies, a meta-analysis was not possible.
DISCUSSION
This review highlights the limited evidence based for the current guidance on treatment of complicated crown fractures. The findings of the review indicate high success rates for pulpotomy; however, there is a moderate risk of bias and small sample sizes in the included studies with the result that the overall results should be interpreted with caution.
CONCLUSION
Within the limitations of this review, the benefits and high success rates reported for partial pulpotomy suggest this procedure, rather than pulp-capping, should be considered as the treatment of choice for both immature and mature teeth that have suffered complicated crown-fractures.
Topics: Crowns; Dental Pulp Capping; Dentition, Permanent; Humans; Pulpotomy; Retrospective Studies; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 35076954
DOI: 10.1111/iej.13690 -
Head & Face Medicine Mar 2018Primary failure of eruption (PFE) is a rare disease defined as incomplete tooth eruption despite the presence of a clear eruption pathway. Orthodontic extrusion is not...
BACKGROUND
Primary failure of eruption (PFE) is a rare disease defined as incomplete tooth eruption despite the presence of a clear eruption pathway. Orthodontic extrusion is not feasible in this case because it results in ankylosis of teeth. To the best of our knowledge, besides the study of Ahmad et al. (Eur J Orthod 28:535-540, 2006), no study has systematically analysed the clinical features of and factors associated with PFE. Therefore, the aim of this study was to systematically evaluate the current literature (from 2006 to 2017) for new insights and developments on the aetiology, diagnosis, genetics, and treatment options of PFE.
METHODS
Following the PRISMA guidelines, a systematic search was performed using the PubMed/Medline database for studies reporting on PFE. The following terms were used: "primary failure of tooth eruption", "primary failure of eruption", "tooth eruption failure", and "PFE".
RESULTS
Overall, 17 articles reporting clinical data of 314 patients were identified. In all patients, the molars were affected. In 81 reported cases, both the molars and the premolars were affected by PFE. Further, 38 patients' primary teeth were also affected. In 27 patients, no family members were affected. Additional dental anomalies were observed in 39 patients. A total of 51 different variants of the PTH1R gene associated with PFE were recorded.
CONCLUSIONS
Infraocclusion of the posterior teeth, especially if both sides are affected, is the hallmark of PFE. If a patient is affected by PFE, all teeth distal to the most mesial tooth are also affected by PFE. Primary teeth can also be impacted; however, this may not necessarily occur. If a patient is suspected of having PFE, a genetic test for mutation in the PTH1R gene should be recommended prior to any orthodontic treatment to avoid ankylosis. Treatment options depend on the patient's age and the clinical situation, and they must be evaluated individually.
Topics: Age Factors; Bicuspid; Child, Preschool; Female; Follow-Up Studies; Humans; Infant; Male; Molar; Orthodontic Extrusion; Radiography, Panoramic; Sex Factors; Tooth Ankylosis; Tooth Eruption; Tooth, Deciduous; Tooth, Unerupted
PubMed: 29544499
DOI: 10.1186/s13005-018-0163-7 -
European Archives of Paediatric... Feb 2022To systematically review the treatment modalities for molar-incisor hypomineralisation for children under the age of 18 years. The research question was, 'What are the...
PURPOSE
To systematically review the treatment modalities for molar-incisor hypomineralisation for children under the age of 18 years. The research question was, 'What are the treatment options for teeth in children affected by molar incisor hypomineralisation?'
METHODS
An electronic search of the following electronic databases was completed MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, LILACS, Google Scholar and Open Grey identifying studies from 1980 to 2020. The PRISMA guidelines were followed. The studies were screened, data extracted and calibration was completed by two independent reviewers.
RESULTS
Of 6220 potential articles, 34 studies were included. Twenty studies investigated management of molars with fissure sealants, glass ionomer cement, polyacid modified resin composite, composite resin, amalgam, preformed metal crowns, laboratory-manufactured crowns and extractions. In four articles management of incisors with microabrasion, resin-infiltration and a combination of approaches was reported. Eight studies looked at strategies to mineralise MIH-affected teeth and/or reduce hypersensitivity. Two studies investigated patient-centred outcomes following treatment. Due to the heterogeneity between the studies, meta-analysis was not performed.
CONCLUSION
The use of resin-based fissure sealants, preformed metal crowns, direct composite resin restorations and laboratory-made restorations can be recommended for MIH-affected molars. There is insufficient evidence to support specific approaches for the management of affected incisors. Products containing CPP-ACP may be beneficial for MIH-affected teeth.
Topics: Adolescent; Child; Composite Resins; Dental Enamel Hypoplasia; Humans; Incisor; Molar; Pit and Fissure Sealants
PubMed: 34110615
DOI: 10.1007/s40368-021-00635-0 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Dec 2017Dental caries is a sugar-dependent disease that damages tooth structure and, due to loss of mineral components, may eventually lead to cavitation. Dental caries is the... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Dental caries is a sugar-dependent disease that damages tooth structure and, due to loss of mineral components, may eventually lead to cavitation. Dental caries is the most prevalent disease worldwide and is considered the most important burden of oral health. Conventional treatment methods (drill and fill) involve the use of rotary burs under local anaesthesia. The need for an electricity supply, expensive handpieces and highly trained dental health personnel may limit access to dental treatment, especially in underdeveloped regions.To overcome the limitations of conventional restorative treatment, the Atraumatic Restorative Treatment (ART) was developed, mainly for treating caries in children living in under-served areas of the world where resources and facilities such as electricity and trained manpower are limited. ART is a minimally invasive approach which involves removal of decayed tissue using hand instruments alone, usually without use of anaesthesia and electrically driven equipment, and restoration of the dental cavity with an adhesive material (glass ionomer cement (GIC), composite resins, resin-modified glass-ionomer cement (RM-GICs) and compomers).
OBJECTIVES
To assess the effects of Atraumatic Restorative Treatment (ART) compared with conventional treatment for managing dental caries lesions in the primary and permanent teeth of children and adults.
SEARCH METHODS
Cochrane Oral Health's Information Specialist searched the following databases: Cochrane Oral Health's Trials Register (to 22 February 2017), the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (the Cochrane Library, 2017, Issue 1), MEDLINE Ovid (1946 to 22 February 2017), Embase Ovid (1980 to 22 February 2017), LILACS BIREME Virtual Health Library (Latin American and Caribbean Health Science Information database; 1982 to 22 February 2017) and BBO BIREME Virtual Health Library (Bibliografia Brasileira de Odontologia; 1986 to 22 February 2017). The US National Institutes of Health Trials Registry (ClinicalTrials.gov) and the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform were searched for ongoing trials. No restrictions were placed on the language or date of publication when searching the electronic databases.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) with at least six months' follow-up that compared the effects of ART with a conventional restorative approach using the same or different restorative dental materials to treat caries lesions.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two review authors independently screened search results, extracted data from included studies and assessed the risk of bias in those studies. We used standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane to evaluate risk of bias and synthesise data. Where pooling was appropriate we conducted meta-analyses using the random-effects model. We assessed the quality of the evidence using GRADE criteria.
MAIN RESULTS
We included a total of 15 eligible studies randomising 3760 participants in this review. The age of participants across the studies ranged from 3 to 101 years, with a mean of 25.42 years. 48% of participants were male. All included studies were published between 2002 and 2016. Two of the 15 studies declared that the financial support was from companies that manufacture restorative material. Five studies were individually randomised parallel-group studies; six were cluster-randomised parallel-group studies; and four were randomised studies that used a split-mouth design. Eleven studies evaluated the effects of ART on primary teeth only, and four on permanent teeth. The follow-up period of the included studies ranged from 6 months to 36 months. We judged all studies to be at high risk of bias.For the main comparison of ART compared to conventional treatment using the same material: all but two studies used high-viscosity glass ionomer (H-GIC) as the restorative material; one study used a composite material; and one study used resin-modified glass ionomer cement (RM-GIC)).Compared to conventional treatment using H-GIC, ART may increase the risk of restoration failure in the primary dentition, over a follow-up period from 12 to 24 months (OR 1.60, 95% CI 1.13 to 2.27, five studies; 643 participants analysed; low-quality evidence). Our confidence in this effect estimate is limited due to serious concerns over risk of performance and attrition bias. For this comparison, ART may reduce pain during procedure compared with conventional treatment (MD -0.65, 95% CI -1.38 to 0.07; 40 participants analysed; low-quality evidence)Comparisons of ART to conventional treatment using composite or RM-GIC were downgraded to very low quality due to indirectness, imprecision and high risk of performance and attrition bias. Given the very low quality of the evidence from single studies, we are uncertain about the restoration failure of ART compared with conventional treatment using composite over a 24-month follow-up period (OR 1.11, 95% CI 0.54 to 2.29; one study; 57 participants) and ART using RM-GIC in the permanent teeth of older adults with root caries lesions over a six-month follow-up period (OR 2.71, 95% CI 0.94 to 7.81; one study; 64 participants).No studies reported on adverse events or costs.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
Low-quality evidence suggests that ART using H-GIC may have a higher risk of restoration failure than conventional treatment for caries lesions in primary teeth. The effects of ART using composite and RM-GIC are uncertain due to the very low quality of the evidence and we cannot rely on the findings. Most studies evaluated the effects of ART on the primary dentition.Well-designed RCTs are required that report on restoration failure at clinically meaningful time points, as well as participant-reported outcomes such as pain and discomfort. Due to the potential confounding effects from the use of different dental materials, a robust body of evidence on the effects of ART compared with conventional treatment using the same restoration material is necessary. We identified four ongoing trials that could provide further insights into this area.
Topics: Adult; Child; Dental Atraumatic Restorative Treatment; Dental Caries; Dental Restoration Failure; Dentition, Permanent; Female; Glass Ionomer Cements; Humans; Male; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Tooth, Deciduous; Toothache
PubMed: 29284075
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD008072.pub2 -
Journal of Clinical Periodontology Jun 2019The aim of this systematic review was to critically analyse the available evidence on the effect of different modalities of alveolar ridge preservation (ARP) as compared... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
AIM
The aim of this systematic review was to critically analyse the available evidence on the effect of different modalities of alveolar ridge preservation (ARP) as compared to tooth extraction alone in function of relevant clinical, radiographic and patient-centred outcomes.
MATERIAL AND METHODS
A comprehensive search aimed at identifying pertinent literature for the purpose of this review was conducted by two independent examiners. Only randomized clinical trials (RCTs) that met the eligibility criteria were selected. Relevant data from these RCTs were collated into evidence tables. Endpoints of interest included clinical, radiographic and patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs). Interventions reported in the selected studies were clustered into ARP treatment modalities. All these different ARP modalities were compared to the control therapy (i.e. spontaneous socket healing) in each individual study after a 3- to 6-month healing period. Random-effects meta-analyses were conducted if at least two studies within the same ARP treatment modality reported on the same outcome of interest.
RESULTS
A combined database, grey literature and hand search identified 3,003 records, of which 1,789 were screened after removal of duplicates. Following the application of the eligibility criteria, 25 articles for a total of 22 RCTs were included in the final selection, from which nine different ARP treatment modalities were identified: (a) bovine bone particles (BBP) + socket sealing (SS), (b) construct made of 90% bovine bone granules and 10% porcine collagen (BBG/PC) + SS, (c) cortico-cancellous porcine bone particles (CPBP) + SS, (d) allograft particles (AG) + SS, (e) alloplastic material (AP) with or without SS, (f) autologous blood-derived products (ABDP), (g) cell therapy (CTh), (h) recombinant morphogenic protein-2 (rhBMP-2) and (i) SS alone. Quantitative analyses for different ARP modalities, all of which involved socket grafting with a bone substitute, were feasible for a subset of clinical and radiographic outcomes. The results of a pooled quantitative analysis revealed that ARP via socket grafting (ARP-SG), as compared to tooth extraction alone, prevents horizontal (M = 1.99 mm; 95% CI 1.54-2.44; p < 0.00001), vertical mid-buccal (M = 1.72 mm; 95% CI 0.96-2.48; p < 0.00001) and vertical mid-lingual (M = 1.16 mm; 95% CI 0.81-1.52; p < 0.00001) bone resorption. Whether there is a superior ARP or SS approach could not be determined on the basis of the selected evidence. However, the application of particulate xenogenic or allogenic materials covered with an absorbable collagen membrane or a rapidly absorbable collagen sponge was associated with the most favourable outcomes in terms of horizontal ridge preservation. A specific quantitative analysis showed that sites presenting a buccal bone thickness >1.0 mm exhibited more favourable ridge preservation outcomes (difference between ARP [AG + SS] and control = 3.2 mm), as compared to sites with a thinner buccal wall (difference between ARP [AG + SS] and control = 1.29 mm). The effect of other local and systemic factors could not be assessed as part of the quantitative analyses. PROMs were comparable between the experimental and the control group in two studies involving the use of ABDP. The effect of other ARP modalities on PROMs could not be investigated, as these outcomes were not reported in any other clinical trial included in this study.
CONCLUSION
Alveolar ridge preservation is an effective therapy to attenuate the dimensional reduction of the alveolar ridge that normally takes place after tooth extraction.
Topics: Alveolar Bone Loss; Alveolar Process; Alveolar Ridge Augmentation; Animals; Bone Substitutes; Bone Transplantation; Cattle; Humans; Swine; Tooth Extraction; Tooth Socket
PubMed: 30623987
DOI: 10.1111/jcpe.13057 -
Clinical Oral Investigations Jan 2019The purpose of this systematic review was to compare the clinical performance of bulk-fill resin composites with conventional resin composites used for direct... (Comparative Study)
Comparative Study Meta-Analysis
OBJECTIVES
The purpose of this systematic review was to compare the clinical performance of bulk-fill resin composites with conventional resin composites used for direct restorations of posterior teeth.
METHODS
This review followed the PRISMA statement. This review was registered at PROSPERO (registration number CRD42016053436). A search of the scientific literature was performed by two independent reviewers using the PubMed/MEDLINE, Embase, The Cochrane Library, and Web of Science databases from commencement until January 2018. The research question was "Do bulk-fill resin composites have a clinical performance comparable to conventional resin composites in posterior restorations?" Only studies evaluating class I and II direct restorations in permanent teeth with a follow-up period of at least 1 year were included. The RevMan 5 program was used for meta-analysis, calculating the relative risk (RR) and 95% confidence interval (CI) of the dichotomous outcome (restoration failure or success).
RESULTS
Ten articles were selected, comprising 941 analyzed restorations. The mean follow-up period was 33.6 months (12-72 months). No statistically significant differences in the failure rate were observed between conventional and base/flowable bulk-fill resin composites (p = 0.31; RR 1.49; 95% CI 0.69-3.25) or full-body/sculptable bulk-fill resin composites (p = 0.12; RR 1.89; 95% CI 0.84-4.24).
CONCLUSIONS
The present systematic review and meta-analysis indicate similar clinical performances of bulk-fill and conventional resin composites over a follow-up period of 12 to 72 months.
CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE
Based on the results of this study, the bulk-fill resin composites could be an alternative for direct restorations in posterior teeth. However, clinical trials of longer duration are required.
Topics: Composite Resins; Dental Restoration, Permanent; Dentition, Permanent; Humans; Time Factors
PubMed: 29594349
DOI: 10.1007/s00784-018-2429-7 -
Clinical Oral Investigations Aug 2020The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to compare the use of platelet-rich fibrin (PRF) with other commonly utilized treatment modalities for root... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
OBJECTIVES
The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to compare the use of platelet-rich fibrin (PRF) with other commonly utilized treatment modalities for root coverage procedures.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
The eligibility criteria comprised randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing the performance of PRF with that of other modalities in the treatment of Miller class I or II (Cairo RT I) gingival recessions. Studies were classified into 5 categories as follows: (1) coronally advanced flap (CAF) alone vs CAF/PRF, (2) CAF/connective tissue graft (CAF/CTG) vs CAF/PRF, (3) CAF/enamel matrix derivative (CAF/EMD) vs CAF/PRF, (4) CAF/amnion membrane (CAF/AM) vs CAF/PRF, and (5) CAF/CTG vs CAF/CTG/PRF. Studies were evaluated for percentage of relative root coverage (rRC; primary outcome), clinical attachment level (CAL), keratinized mucosa width (KMW), and probing depth (PD) (secondary outcomes).
RESULTS
From 976 articles identified, 17 RCTs were included. The use of PRF statistically significantly increased rRC and CAL compared with CAF alone. No change in KMW or reduction in PD was reported. Compared with PRF, CTG resulted in statistically significantly better KMW and RC. No statistically significant differences were reported between the CAF/PRF and CAF/EMD groups or between the CAF/PRF and CAF/AM groups for any of the investigated parameters.
CONCLUSIONS
The use of CAF/PRF improved rRC and CAL compared with the use of CAF alone. While similar outcomes were observed between CAF/PRF and CAF/CTG for CAL and PD change, the latter group led to statistically significantly better outcomes in terms of rRC and KTW. In summary, the use of PRF in conjunction with CAF may represent a valid treatment modality for gingival recessions exhibiting adequate baseline KMW.
CLINICAL RELEVANCE
The data indicate that the use of PRF in conjunction with CAF statistically significantly improves rRC when compared with CAF alone but did not improve KMW. Therefore, in cases with limited baseline KMW, the use of CTG may be preferred over PRF.
Topics: Connective Tissue; Gingiva; Gingival Recession; Humans; Platelet-Rich Fibrin; Surgical Flaps; Tooth Root; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 32591868
DOI: 10.1007/s00784-020-03400-7 -
Scientific Reports Nov 2022Treatment planning is key to clinical success. Permanent teeth diagnosed with "irreversible pulpitis" have long been implied to have an irreversibly damaged dental pulp... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
Treatment planning is key to clinical success. Permanent teeth diagnosed with "irreversible pulpitis" have long been implied to have an irreversibly damaged dental pulp that is beyond repair and warranting root canal treatment. However, newer clinical approaches such as pulpotomy, a minimally invasive and biologically based procedure have re-emerged to manage teeth with pulpitis. The primary aim of the study was to conduct a meta-analysis to comprehensively estimate the overall success rate of pulpotomy in permanent teeth with irreversible pulpitis as a result of carious pulp exposure. The secondary aim of the study was to investigate the effect of predictors such as symptoms, root apex development (closed versus open), and type of pulp capping material on the success rate of pulpotomy. Articles were searched using PubMed, Scopus, CENTRAL, and Web of Science databases, until January 2021. Outcomes were calculated by pooling the success rates with a random effect model. Comparison between the different subgroups was conducted using the z statistic test for proportion with significance set at alpha = 0.05. A total of 1,116 records were retrieved and 11 studies were included in the quantitative analysis. The pooled success rate for pulpotomy in teeth with irreversible pulpitis was 86% [95% CI: 0.76-0.92; I = 81.9%]. Additionally, prognostic indicators of success were evaluated. Stratification of teeth based on (1) symptoms demonstrated that teeth with symptomatic and asymptomatic irreversible pulpitis demonstrated success rate of 84% and 91% respectively, with no significant difference (p = 0.18) using z-score analysis; (2) open apex teeth demonstrated a significantly greater success rate (96%) compared to teeth with closed apex (83%) (p = 0.02), and (3) pulp capping materials demonstrated that Biodentine yielded significantly better success rates compared to Mineral Trioxide Aggregate (MTA), calcium hydroxide, and Calcium Enriched Mixture (CEM.) Collectively, this is the first meta-analytical study to determine the clinical outcome of pulpotomy for carious teeth with irreversible pulpitis and it's predictors for success. Moreover, we identify the stage of root development and type of biomaterial as predictors for success of pulpotomy.
Topics: Humans; Pulpotomy; Pulpitis; Dentition, Permanent; Calcium Hydroxide; Root Canal Therapy
PubMed: 36385132
DOI: 10.1038/s41598-022-20918-w -
The Journal of Clinical Pediatric... 2019This systematic review and meta-analysis assessed clinical, radiographic and functional retention outcomes in immature necrotic permanent teeth treated either with pulp... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
This systematic review and meta-analysis assessed clinical, radiographic and functional retention outcomes in immature necrotic permanent teeth treated either with pulp revascularization or apexification after a minimum of three months to determine which one provides the best results. The literature was screened via PubMed/MEDLINE and Embase databases up to June 2017 to select observational studies that compared pulp revascularization and apexification treatments assessing clinical, radiographic and functional retention outcomes. Two reviewers independently performed screening and evaluation of articles. A total of 231 articles were retrieved from databases, wherein only four articles were selected for full-text analyses. After exclusion criteria, three studies remained in quantitative and qualitative analyses. Pooled-effect estimates were obtained comparing clinical and radiographic outcomes ('overall outcome') and functional retention rates between apexification and pulp revascularization treatment. The meta-analysis comparing apexification vs. revascularization for 'overall outcome' (Z=0.113, p=0.910, RR=1.009, 95%CI:0.869-1.171) and functional retention rates (Z=1.438, p=0.150, RR=1.069, 95%CI:0.976-1.172) showed no statistically significant differences between the treatments. All studies were classified as high quality. The current literature regarding the clinical, radiographic and functional retention outcomes in immature necrotic permanent teeth treated either with pulp revascularization or apexification is limited. Based on our meta-analysis, the results do not favor one treatment modality over the other.
Topics: Apexification; Dental Pulp; Dental Pulp Necrosis; Dentition, Permanent; Humans; Observational Studies as Topic; Tooth Apex
PubMed: 31560588
DOI: 10.17796/1053-4625-43.5.1