-
International Journal of Oral and... Jan 2017This systematic review aimed to determine: (1) the expected bone volume gain with the split crest technique, and (2) how the use of surgical instruments affects the... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
This systematic review aimed to determine: (1) the expected bone volume gain with the split crest technique, and (2) how the use of surgical instruments affects the performance of this technique. An electronic search was performed in the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, ClinicalTrials.gov, Embase, PubMed/MEDLINE, Scopus, and Web of Science databases. Twenty-seven articles met the selection criteria and were subjected to meta-analysis of bone gain and survival rate; 17 reported the use of conventional surgical instruments and nine the use of surgical ultrasound. A total of 4115 implants were installed in 1732 patients (average patient age 52 years). The overall implant survival rate was 97%. The average bone gain in studies that used conventional surgical instruments was 3.61mm, while this was 3.69mm in those that used ultrasound. Only two studies presented a low risk of bias. The greatest problems identified during the qualitative analysis were related to random selection of the population and the absence of statistical analysis. The split crest technique appears to be a promising and effective technique to gain bone width, regardless of the surgical instruments used. Considering the diversity of the studies and implant types, no definitive recommendations can be made, especially with regard to the best instruments and implant design to be used.
Topics: Alveolar Ridge Augmentation; Dental Implantation, Endosseous; Dental Implants; Dental Prosthesis Retention; Dental Restoration Failure; Humans; Piezosurgery; Surgical Instruments
PubMed: 27639295
DOI: 10.1016/j.ijom.2016.08.017 -
Journal of Prosthodontics : Official... Feb 2022This is a systematic review to identify the incidence of pulp necrosis and/or periapical changes among vital teeth which are used as an abutment for crown and fixed... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
PURPOSE
This is a systematic review to identify the incidence of pulp necrosis and/or periapical changes among vital teeth which are used as an abutment for crown and fixed partial dentures (FPDs).
MATERIALS AND METHODS
Two reviewers independently searched two electronic databases, PubMed and Scopus. The search was complemented from references of included studies and published reviews. Studies published in the English language through January 2021 that had assessed and documented the clinical and radiographic failure of crown or FPD in vital permanent teeth due to pulpal or periapical pathology with a follow-up of at least 12 months were selected. Data screening, data collection and extraction of data was performed. Quality of studies involved was analyzed using the Newcastle-Ottawa Quality Assessment Scale for cohort studies. Meta-analysis was done using random effects model. Publication bias was assessed using funnel plots.
RESULTS
Electronic searches provided 10,075 records among which 20 studies were selected for systematic review and 7 studies were selected for meta-analysis. With respect to quality assessment, all the studies involved were considered as high quality as the score in scale ranged between 6 and 9 as per the Newcastle-Ottawa Quality Assessment Scale for cohort studies. The meta-analyses showed that there was no statistically significant difference in the incidence of the loss of pulp vitality or pulp necrosis through clinical and radiographic examination with the follow up period of 5 years: p < 0.001, 95% CI: 0.96-1.00, I = 77.84%; 10 years: p < 0.001, 95% CI: 0.88-0.95, I = 93.59%; 15 years: p < 0.001, 95% CI: 0.92-0.96, I = 94.83%; and 20 years: p < 0.001, 95% CI: 0.94-0.96, I = 95.01%.
CONCLUSIONS
The meta-analysis revealed clinical and radiographic success rate ranging between 92% to 98% at different follow up periods ranging between 5 years and 20 years. Future high-quality randomized clinical controlled trials with a larger population are required to confirm the evidence as only observational studies were considered in this paper.
Topics: Crowns; Dental Implants; Denture, Partial, Fixed; Humans
PubMed: 34516686
DOI: 10.1111/jopr.13433 -
The Journal of Evidence-based Dental... Dec 2018Direct pulp capping therapies use biomaterials to protect exposed tissues, inducing repair through the production of a mineralized barrier. The purpose of this study was... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
INTRODUCTION
Direct pulp capping therapies use biomaterials to protect exposed tissues, inducing repair through the production of a mineralized barrier. The purpose of this study was to compare the effectiveness of biomaterials and techniques by means of a systematic review and meta-analysis.
METHODS
The PubMed, Cochrane, and Embase databases were used to search the literature published from January 1, 1980 until August 31, 2017. Studies that met inclusion criteria were screened by 2 authors individually. The meta-analysis was performed on mineral trioxide aggregate (MTA) cement vs calcium hydroxide cement, tricalcium silicate cement vs MTA cement, and adhesive systems vs CaOH cement and evaluated the success rate, inflammatory response, and dentin bridge formation.
RESULTS
Forty-six studies were included in the systematic review, while 22 studies were included in the meta-analysis. There was no significant heterogeneity between the studies. MTA cements showed a significantly higher success rate, in all parameters, compared with calcium hydroxide cements (odds ratio = 2.72; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.90-3.90; P = 0.000). However, when compared with the tricalcium silicate cements, there were no statistically significant differences (odds ratio = 1.18; 95% CI = 0.53-2.65; P = 0.672). Adhesive systems showed a significantly lower success rate, in all parameters, compared with calcium hydroxide cements (odds ratio = 0.062; 95% CI = 0.024-0.157; P = 0.000).
CONCLUSIONS
MTA cements have a higher success rate, with a lower inflammatory response and a more predictable hard dentin barrier formation than calcium hydroxide cements. However, there were no differences, in these parameters, when MTA cement was compared with tricalcium silicate cements. Dental adhesives systems showed the lowest success rates.
Topics: Dental Cements; Dental Pulp Capping; Humans; Root Canal Therapy
PubMed: 30514444
DOI: 10.1016/j.jebdp.2018.02.002 -
Journal of Stomatology, Oral and... Oct 2022Systematic mapping review AIM AND SCOPE: The objective of this mapping review was to identify, describe, and organize clinical research currently available from...
STUDY DESIGN
Systematic mapping review AIM AND SCOPE: The objective of this mapping review was to identify, describe, and organize clinical research currently available from systematic reviews and primary studies regarding co-interventions and different surgical modalities used in orthognathic surgery (OS) and their outcomes.
METHODS
Systematic reviews (SRs), randomized controlled trials, and observational studies that evaluated perioperative OS co-interventions and surgical modalities were identified in an exhaustive search of MEDLINE, EMBASE, Epistemonikos, Lilacs, Web of Science, and CENTRAL. Grey literature was also screened.
RESULTS
Included were 35 SRs and 253 primary studies, 103 from SRs, and another 150 identified in our search. Overall, SR quality was rated as critically low, with only two SRs rated as of high quality. 19 questions on population, interventions, comparisons, and outcomes (PICO) extracted from the SRs focused on osteosynthesis methods, surgical cutting devices, and use of antibiotics, corticosteroids, and induced hypotension. Also identified were 15 research gaps. Evidence bubble maps were created to graphically depict the available evidence.
CONCLUSION
Future high-quality research, both primary and secondary, is needed to address the knowledge gaps identified in this systematic mapping review.
Topics: Adrenal Cortex Hormones; Anti-Bacterial Agents; Humans; Orthognathic Surgery; Orthognathic Surgical Procedures
PubMed: 35568120
DOI: 10.1016/j.jormas.2022.05.011 -
BMC Oral Health Jan 2024Periodontal phenotype is regarded to be one of the key factors influencing the efficacy of restorative therapies in dental practice. The objective of the systematic...
BACKGROUND
Periodontal phenotype is regarded to be one of the key factors influencing the efficacy of restorative therapies in dental practice. The objective of the systematic review was to explore the importance of thin and thick periodontal phenotypes and how they affect the outcome of periodontal and restorative therapies by looking at a number of academic publications from various online databases.
METHODS
Following the PRISMA guidelines (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review standards), relevant data will be searched and retrieved from three significant scientific databases, including PubMed, EBSCO, and Scopus. The articles with full texts that matched the keywords and published in English between 2018 and 2023 were taken into consideration.
RESULTS
The majorities of these articles were based on the type of periodontal phenotype and their impact on periodontal and restorative treatment outcomes were selected. The initial search yielded a total of 530 articles. Only 273 were relevant to the review's objectives, and these were considered for determining eligibility. Only 20 publications were eligible for analysis.
CONCLUSION
Understanding these anatomical aspects of periodontal phenotype is crucial to both periodontology and restorative dentistry. The clinical outcome of restorative, prosthetic, orthodontic, surgical, and periodontal therapies is determined in large part by the periodontal phenotype, which also plays a significant role in clinical failure or success in dental treatments.
TRIAL REGISTRATION
This study protocol registered with the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO) dated 16th June 2023 with the registration ID CRD42023432568.
Topics: Humans; Periodontics; Dental Care; Databases, Factual; Phenotype
PubMed: 38191372
DOI: 10.1186/s12903-023-03777-3 -
Journal of Clinical Periodontology Sep 2016A systematic review/meta-analysis was performed to evaluate pain during probing, scaling and root planing using intra-pocket anaesthesia versus placebo in adult patients. (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
AIM
A systematic review/meta-analysis was performed to evaluate pain during probing, scaling and root planing using intra-pocket anaesthesia versus placebo in adult patients.
METHODS
A search was performed in PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, Latin American and Caribbean Health Sciences Literature database, Brazilian Library in Dentistry, Cochrane Library and Grey literature. IADR abstracts, unpublished trials registries, dissertations and theses were also searched for randomized clinical trials comparing the clinical effectiveness of intra-pocket anaesthesia and placebo. Risk/intensity of pain was the primary outcome. The risk of bias tool from the Cochrane Collaboration was used for quality assessment. Meta-analysis was performed on studies considered at low risk of bias.
RESULTS
A total of 1740 articles were identified. Eleven remained in the qualitative synthesis, and nine studies were considered at "low" risk of bias for meta-analysis. Standardized Hedge's g mean difference for pain intensity using visual analogue scale and Heft-Parker pain scales was -0.576 (95% confidence interval [CI] -0.94 to -0.22; p = 0.002) and for verbal rating scale pain scale it was -1.814 (95% CI -3.38 to -0.245; p = 0.023). The odds ratio for the risk of pain was 0.025 (95% CI 0.003 to 0.25; p = 0.002) and the odds ratio for the need for rescue anaesthesia it was 0.358 (95% CI 0.174 to 0.736; p = 0.005).
CONCLUSIONS
The anaesthetic gel decreases the risk and intensity of pain during probing/SRP.
Topics: Anesthesia, Dental; Brazil; Dental Scaling; Humans; Pain; Pain Measurement; Root Planing
PubMed: 27097588
DOI: 10.1111/jcpe.12565 -
The Journal of Contemporary Dental... Dec 2023The purpose of this systematic review was to evaluate the cost-effectiveness and acceptance of children and their parents of the Hall technique (HT) for dental...
AIMS
The purpose of this systematic review was to evaluate the cost-effectiveness and acceptance of children and their parents of the Hall technique (HT) for dental rehabilitation in pediatric dentistry.
BACKGROUND
The approach of the HT is that of minimally invasive treatment of the dental element and is used exclusively on primary molars. Various studies in the literature point to HT as a restorative option well accepted by children and parents and quite predictable, with low retreatment rates and good cost-effectiveness for the management of primary molars with carious lesions. However, no systematic review in the literature has approached randomized clinical trials on these topics to produce a high level of evidence and help establish clinical HT protocols.
REVIEW RESULTS
Eight articles were selected for the systematic review. The HT was more cost-effective than procedures using other restorative materials. Regarding acceptance, in terms of esthetics, high percentages of satisfaction were reported for parents and children, with a divergence between studies in the comparison of esthetic preference with atraumatic restorative treatment. However, when considering crown cementation pain, comfort, anxiety, preference, and satisfaction, the HT was generally better evaluated when compared to other restorative materials.
CONCLUSION
The HT is an excellent restorative option when considering cost-effectiveness and acceptance and is recommended for use in daily clinical practice.
CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE
Results indicate that HT is superior to other restorative materials regarding its acceptance by children and parents in terms of pain, comfort, anxiety, and crown preference and satisfaction. There were also high percentages of satisfaction with esthetics. Hall technique may initially appear expensive for dentists, but its effectiveness over time and the lesser need for consultations and reinventions ensure better cost-benefit than other restorative materials. How to cite this article: Valentim FB, Moreira KMS, Carneiro VC, . Cost-effectiveness and Acceptance in Children and Parents of the Hall Technique: Systematic Review of Clinical Trials. J Contemp Dent Pract 2023;24(12):1016-1025.
Topics: Child; Humans; Cost-Benefit Analysis; Dental Atraumatic Restorative Treatment; Tooth, Deciduous; Dental Restoration, Permanent; Esthetics, Dental; Dental Caries; Dental Materials; Pain; Parents
PubMed: 38317401
DOI: 10.5005/jp-journals-10024-3607 -
The Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry Oct 2022Although recent studies have reported the success of implant-supported monolithic restorations, consensus on the use of monolithic ceramic restorations is lacking. (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
STATEMENT OF PROBLEM
Although recent studies have reported the success of implant-supported monolithic restorations, consensus on the use of monolithic ceramic restorations is lacking.
PURPOSE
The purpose of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to evaluate the survival and biological and technical complication rates of monolithic single crowns and fixed partial dentures (FPDs).
MATERIAL AND METHODS
An electronic search was conducted by 2 independent authors on the PubMed/MEDLINE, Scopus, and Cochrane Library databases. The Newcastle-Ottawa scale and Cochrane risk of bias tool were used to assess the quality and risk of bias of the included studies. Meta-analysis was performed by using the R software program.
RESULTS
The search identified 763 articles, 18 of which met the eligibility criteria. A total of 15 studies evaluated monolithic ceramic single crowns, and 4 studies evaluated FPDs. The studies included 1061 monolithic single crowns (524 lithium disilicate, 461 zirconia, and 76 polymer-infiltrated ceramic network [PICN]) and 104 FPDs (36 lithium disilicate and 68 zirconia). Meta-analysis of single-arm studies indicated the proportion of survival, biological, and technical complication rates of 1% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0% to 3%), 1% (CI: 0% to 4%), and 2% (CI: 1% to 4%), respectively, for single crowns, independent of ceramic material, and 3% (CI: 0% to 34%), 5% (CI: 1% to 21%), and 5% (CI: 1% to 21%) for FPDs, respectively. Only 5 studies performed a direct comparison between monolithic and veneered ceramic restorations, and no significant difference was observed in terms of survival (risk ratio [RR]: 0.68; CI: 0.25-1.91; P=.96), biological (RR: 0.69; CI: 0.31-1.53; P=.35), and technical complication rates (RR: 0.87; CI: 0.40-1.88; P=.29).
CONCLUSIONS
The use of monolithic ceramic can be considered a favorable treatment for tooth-supported single crowns and FPDs, with high survival and low complication rates. However, further randomized controlled trials are needed to reassess these clinical performances, mainly by comparing them with the performance of veneered restorations.
Topics: Dental Restoration Failure; Dental Prosthesis Design; Zirconium; Dental Porcelain; Ceramics; Crowns; Dental Prosthesis, Implant-Supported
PubMed: 33745685
DOI: 10.1016/j.prosdent.2021.01.020 -
Clinical Oral Implants Research Sep 2023To analyze the effect of implant treatment in edentulous patients rehabilitated with implant-supported fixed complete dentures (IFCDs) or implant overdentures (IODs) on... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
OBJECTIVES
To analyze the effect of implant treatment in edentulous patients rehabilitated with implant-supported fixed complete dentures (IFCDs) or implant overdentures (IODs) on dental patient-reported outcomes (dPROs).
MATERIALS AND METHODS
In January 2022, Medline, Embase, CINAHL, Cochrane Library, PubMed Central, Web of Science, and ClinicalTrials.gov were screened for prospective clinical studies on completely edentulous patients treated with IFCDs and/or IODs, reporting pre-treatment and follow-up dPROs. Hedges' g effect sizes (ES) with corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CI) were calculated. Afterward, meta-analyses were conducted using random effect models.
RESULTS
A total number of 1608 records was initially identified. Of those, 28 studies reporting dPROs from 1457 patients were finally included. The applied dental patient-reported outcome measures (dPROMs) included several versions of the Oral Health Impact Profile (OHIP) or specific items assessing satisfaction with Visual Analogue Scales (VAS). The overall ES was large for rehabilitation with IFCDs (1.68 [CI: 1.15, 2.20]) and IODs (1.26 [CI: 0.99, 1.52]) with no significant difference (p = .165) between the two. Denture stability was the only factor rated significantly higher for IFCDs (ES difference: 2.37 [CI: 0.21, 4.54]; p = .032). Subgroup analyses revealed moderately higher ES for IODs on two implants relative to one implant (ES difference: 0.73 [CI: 0.34, 1.12]; p < .001).
CONCLUSIONS
There is a strong positive effect of implant treatment in edentulous patients, independent of the type of prosthetic rehabilitation. In patients seeking high stability, IFCDs may be preferable. In mandibular IODs on a single implant, there was a significantly positive effect of an additional implant on dPROs.
Topics: Humans; Denture, Overlay; Prospective Studies; Dental Implants; Denture, Complete; Mouth, Edentulous; Patient Reported Outcome Measures
PubMed: 37750530
DOI: 10.1111/clr.14065 -
Clinical Oral Investigations Feb 2021This systematic review and meta-analysis compared the effects of immediate and delayed post space preparation on apical sealing. (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
OBJECTIVES
This systematic review and meta-analysis compared the effects of immediate and delayed post space preparation on apical sealing.
MATERIALS AND METHOD
Two independent authors conducted a systematic search (PubMed/Medline, Cochrane Library, and other databases, until February 2020) and a risk of bias evaluation. Only in vitro studies that compared the effects of immediate and delayed post space preparations on apical filling and adhesion of the post were eligible.
RESULT
Of the 742 articles retrieved, 32 were included. Most of the studies used single-rooted human teeth and rotary files for root canal preparation, a single-cone technique for the filling protocol, and rotary instruments for post space preparation. Various delayed preparation times were evaluated: 8-72 h, 5-30 days (mainly 7 days), and 4 months. In nine studies, the delayed groups showed more apical leakage, while four studies reported more leakage in the immediate groups; ten studies found no significant difference. One study found more bacterial penetration in the delayed group, whereas three studies showed no significant difference. One study reported more voids in the delayed group, while another found no such difference. Three studies showed better post-bond strength in the delayed group, one in the immediate group, whereas three found no significant difference in post-bond strength. Three studies employing varied sealers for root canal fillings were considered for meta-analysis. Two subgroup analyses were also performed (one concerning the use of resin-based sealers (AH Plus), another for zinc oxide-eugenol-based sealers). The results of the meta-analysis showed that a delayed post space preparation led to a significantly higher apical leakage than an immediate preparation (mean difference = 0.41 mm, confidence interval = 0.24-0.59, p < 0.001).
CONCLUSION
Delayed post space preparation seems to negatively influence apical sealing; however, further studies are needed to determine the influence of the timing of post space preparation on the other parameters.
CLINICAL RELEVANCE
Immediate post space preparation may be the safest clinical choice to prevent apical leakage.
Topics: Dental Leakage; Epoxy Resins; Gutta-Percha; Humans; Post and Core Technique; Root Canal Filling Materials; Root Canal Obturation; Root Canal Preparation
PubMed: 33417064
DOI: 10.1007/s00784-020-03690-x