-
Clinical Oral Investigations Jul 2022This study aimed to systematically review the literature to compare the risk of failure of repaired and replaced defective direct resin composite and amalgam... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
OBJECTIVE
This study aimed to systematically review the literature to compare the risk of failure of repaired and replaced defective direct resin composite and amalgam restorations performed in permanent teeth.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
The PubMed/MEDLINE, Scopus, Lilacs, BBO, Web of Science, SciELO, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) databases, and gray literature were searched to identify longitudinal clinical studies related to the research question. No publication year or language restriction was considered. Two authors independently selected the studies, extracted the data, and assessed the risk of bias and certainty of evidence. A meta-analysis was performed using a fixed effects model at a 5% significance level.
RESULTS
From 1224 potentially eligible studies, thirteen were selected for full-text analysis, and three were included in the systematic review and meta-analysis. There was no difference in the risk of failure of repaired and replaced defective direct restorations (RR: 1.21, 95% CI: 0.51-2.83), either for resin composite (p = 0.97) or amalgam (p = 0.51) restorations. The risk of bias was high and the certainty of evidence was very low.
CONCLUSION
Based on the very low certainty of evidence, the repair of direct restorations does not present a significant difference in the risk of failure when compared to replacements in permanent teeth.
CLINICAL RELEVANCE
Restoration repair is a procedure that is included in the minimal intervention principle for improvement of tooth longevity in that the risk of failure of repaired partially defective restorations in permanent teeth seems similar to that of replacement. Further studies are required before definitive conclusions can be drawn.
Topics: Composite Resins; Dental Amalgam; Dental Care; Dental Restoration Failure; Dental Restoration, Permanent; Dentition, Permanent; Humans
PubMed: 35362754
DOI: 10.1007/s00784-022-04459-0 -
Dermatitis : Contact, Atopic,...This systematic review summarizes characteristics and treatment outcomes of dental amalgam-associated oral lichenoid lesions (OLLs) and oral lichen planus (OLP). Embase...
This systematic review summarizes characteristics and treatment outcomes of dental amalgam-associated oral lichenoid lesions (OLLs) and oral lichen planus (OLP). Embase and MEDLINE were searched for original studies on OLLs or OLP associated with dental amalgam. Data extraction was completed from 44 studies representing 1855 patients. Removal of amalgam restorations led to complete resolution in 54.2% (n = 423/781), partial resolution in 34.8% (n = 272/781), and no resolution in 11.0% (n = 86/781) of the patients with OLLs, whereas complete resolution occurred in 37.1% (n = 72/194), partial resolution in 26.3% (n = 51/194), and no resolution in 36.6% (n = 71/194) of the patients with OLP. For patients with OLLs, 91.6% of the patients with positive patch tests and 82.9% with negative patch tests had improvement with removal of amalgam, whereas for patients with OLP, 89.2% of the patients with positive patch tests and 78.9% with negative patch tests had improvement with removal of amalgam. Our results suggest improvement occurs, regardless of patch testing status.
Topics: Dental Amalgam; Dental Restoration, Permanent; Dermatitis, Allergic Contact; Humans; Lichen Planus, Oral; Mercury; Mouth Mucosa; Patch Tests; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 33273245
DOI: 10.1097/DER.0000000000000703 -
Pediatric Dentistry Jan 2022There are several restorative modalities for molar hypomineralization, but there is no consensus on the best approach. The purpose of this review was to describe...
There are several restorative modalities for molar hypomineralization, but there is no consensus on the best approach. The purpose of this review was to describe restorative approaches applied to permanent first molars (PFM) with molar hypomineralization (MH). This review was registered (PROSPERO database CRD42017078336). Searches were conducted in the PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, LILACS, BBO, and Cochrane Library databases and grey literature. From a total of 1,751 studies, 12 that compared restorative treatments for PFM with MH were included. The risk of bias of the studies was assessed using the Cochrane Collaboration and the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. The success rate was the primary outcome. The restorative treatment options were direct restorations with amalgam, glass ionomer cement, and resin-based composite as well as indirect restorations with stainless steel, porcelain, ceromer, and gold crowns. The restorative techniques, considering the type of isolation and the removal of caries and hypomineralization, vary between the study. There was also a lack of standard clinical criteria for restorative evaluation. The follow-up period ranged from six to 216 months. The success of direct restorations ranged from 86.3 to 100 percent. For indirect restorations, success ranged from 91.3 to 100 percent. There were multiple clinical protocols for MH. The studies presented heterogeneity in the restoration technique, time, and clinical criteria for restorative follow-up. Direct restorations with glass ionomer cement and resin-based composite could be the first choices for restoration. Further randomized clinical trials on a restorative treatment for MH are needed.
Topics: Composite Resins; Dental Amalgam; Dental Caries; Dental Restoration, Permanent; Glass Ionomer Cements; Humans; Molar; Tooth, Deciduous
PubMed: 35232531
DOI: No ID Found -
Dental Materials : Official Publication... Jun 2024To compare the performance of Cention-N® with direct restorative materials used at the daily practice (e.g., resin-based composites/RBC, glass ionomer cements/GIC,... (Review)
Review
OBJECTIVES
To compare the performance of Cention-N® with direct restorative materials used at the daily practice (e.g., resin-based composites/RBC, glass ionomer cements/GIC, bioactive resins, silver amalgam) via a systematic review study.
METHODS
The review followed the PRISMA-NMA recommendations, and the protocol of the review was published at osf.io/ybde8. The search was conducted in PubMed/MEDLINE, Scopus, Web of Science, Embase, Lilacs, and SciELO databases, as well as in the grey literature (Open Grey, Proquest, and Periódicos CAPES). Studies with an in vitro experimental design evaluating the characteristics and properties of Cention-N in comparison to other restorative materials were included. The risk of bias of included studies was assessed using the RoBDEMAT tool, and meta-analyses were conducted using Review Manager 5.4 and MetaInsight V3 tools.
RESULTS
A total of 85 studies were included in the review, from which 79 were meta-analyzed. Several characteristics of direct restorative materials were analyzed, including physical (color change, degree of conversion, hardness, microleakage, polymerization rate, roughness, water solubility, water sorption), mechanical (bond strength to dentin, compressive strength, diametral tensile strength, flexural modulus, flexural strength, load-to-fracture, wear), and biological (alkalinizing effect, antibacterial activity, calcium and fluoride release) properties.
SIGNIFICANCE
Cention-N presented similar physico-mechanical properties compared to RBCs, but a stronger behavior than GICs. Despite the Alkasite nature of Cention-N, GICs may still demonstrate the greatest fluoride releasing ability from all direct restorative materials. This review confirmed the adequate behavior of Cention-N when compared to several other more traditionally used materials, confirming its applicability for the permanent restoration of decayed or fractured teeth.
PubMed: 38880724
DOI: 10.1016/j.dental.2024.06.014 -
European Archives of Paediatric... Oct 2022To systematically review the clinical performance of restorative materials after pulp therapy of carious primary teeth. It is part 2 of a systematic review on the...
PURPOSE
To systematically review the clinical performance of restorative materials after pulp therapy of carious primary teeth. It is part 2 of a systematic review on the clinical effectiveness of restorative materials for the management of carious primary teeth supporting the European Academy of Paediatric Dentistry (EAPD) guideline development.
METHODS
Four electronic databases were systematically searched up to December 28th, 2020. Randomised controlled clinical trials (RCTs) on restorative materials for the restoration of carious primary teeth after pulp therapy were included. Failure rate, annual failure rate (AFR) and reasons for failure were recorded. Studies were sorted by restorative materials. The Cochrane Risk of bias tool for randomised trials (RoB 2.0) was used for quality assessment.
RESULTS
After identification of 1685 articles and screening of 41 papers from EAPD review group 1, 5 RCTs were included. Restored primary molars with pulpotomy presented the following AFRs: composite resin (CR) 0%, preformed metal crowns (PMCs) 2.4-2.5%, resin-modified glass-ionomer cement combined with CR 3.8%, compomer 8.9%, and amalgam 14.3%. Maxillary primary incisors receiving pulpectomy exhibited AFRs of 0-2.3% for composite strip crowns (CSCs) depending on the post chosen. Reasons for failure were secondary caries, poor marginal adaptation, loss of retention and fracture of restoration. All studies were classified as high risk of bias. Meta-analyses were not feasible given the clinical/methodological heterogeneity amongst studies.
CONCLUSION
Considering any limitations of this review, CR and PMCs can be recommended for primary molars after pulpotomy, and CSCs for primary incisors receiving pulpectomy. However, a need for further well-designed RCTs was observed.
Topics: Child; Humans; Tooth, Deciduous; Dental Materials; Dental Caries; Glass Ionomer Cements; Composite Resins; Treatment Outcome; Dental Restoration, Permanent
PubMed: 36056991
DOI: 10.1007/s40368-022-00744-4