-
Vaccines Nov 2023Aluminium adjuvants are commonly used in vaccines to boost the effects of vaccination. Here, we assessed the benefits and harms of different aluminium adjuvants vs.... (Review)
Review
Concentrations, Number of Doses, and Formulations of Aluminium Adjuvants in Vaccines: A Systematic Review with Meta-Analysis and Trial Sequential Analysis of Randomized Clinical Trials.
Aluminium adjuvants are commonly used in vaccines to boost the effects of vaccination. Here, we assessed the benefits and harms of different aluminium adjuvants vs. other aluminium adjuvants or vs. the same aluminium adjuvant at other concentrations, administered a different number of doses, or at different particle sizes used in vaccines or vaccine excipients. We conducted a systematic review with meta-analysis and Trial Sequential Analysis to assess the certainty of evidence with Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE). We obtained data from major medical databases until 20 January 2023 and included 10 randomized clinical trials of healthy volunteers. The comparisons assessed higher vs. lower aluminium adjuvant concentrations; higher vs. lower number of doses of aluminium adjuvant; and aluminium phosphate adjuvant vs. aluminium hydroxide adjuvant. For all three comparisons, meta-analyses showed no evidence of a difference on all-cause mortality, serious adverse events, and adverse events considered non-serious. The certainty of evidence was low to very low. None of the included trials reported on quality of life or proportion of participants who developed the disease being vaccinated against. The benefits and harms of different types of aluminium adjuvants, different aluminium concentrations, different number of doses, or different particle sizes, therefore, remain uncertain.
PubMed: 38140168
DOI: 10.3390/vaccines11121763 -
Clinical and Experimental Dental... Dec 2023Different materials have been used for capping the pulp after exposure during caries removal in permanent teeth. The purpose of this study was to collate and analyze all... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
OBJECTIVES
Different materials have been used for capping the pulp after exposure during caries removal in permanent teeth. The purpose of this study was to collate and analyze all pertinent evidence from randomized controlled trials (RCTs) on different materials used in patients undergoing pulpotomy or direct pulp capping in carious teeth.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
Trials comparing two or more capping agents used for direct pulp capping (DPC) or pulpotomy were considered eligible. An electronic search of four databases and two clinical trial registries was carried out up to February 28, 2021 using a search strategy properly adapted to the PICO framework. Screening, data extraction, and risk of bias (RoB) assessment of primary studies were performed in duplicate and independently. The primary outcome was clinical and radiological success; secondary outcomes included continued root formation, tooth discoloration, and dentin bridge formation.
RESULTS
21 RCTs were included in the study. The RoB assessment indicated a moderate risk among the studies. Due to significant clinical and statistical heterogeneity among the studies, performing network meta-analysis (NMA) was not possible. An ad hoc subgroup analysis revealed strong evidence of a higher success of DPC with Mineral Trioxide Aggregate (MTA) compared to calcium hydroxide (CH) (odds ratio [OR] = 3.10, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.66-5.79). MTA performed better than CH in pulp capping (both DPC and pulpotomy) of mature compared to immature teeth (OR = 3.34, 95% CI: 1.81-6.17). The GRADE assessment revealed moderate strength of evidence for DPC and mature teeth, and low to very low strength of evidence for the remaining subgroups.
CONCLUSIONS
Considerable clinical and statistical heterogeneity among the trials did not allow NMA. The ad hoc subgroup analysis indicated that the clinical and radiographic success of MTA was higher than that of CH but only in mature teeth and DPC cases where the strength of evidence was moderate. PROSPERO Registration: number CRD42020127239.
Topics: Humans; Dental Pulp Capping; Pulpotomy; Calcium Compounds; Aluminum Compounds; Oxides; Silicates; Drug Combinations; Calcium Hydroxide; Dental Caries; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
PubMed: 37710421
DOI: 10.1002/cre2.767 -
International Endodontic Journal Sep 2023The results of vital pulp treatments in permanent teeth have been encouraging. Currently, pulpotomy treatment for permanent teeth primarily utilizes mineral trioxide... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
The results of vital pulp treatments in permanent teeth have been encouraging. Currently, pulpotomy treatment for permanent teeth primarily utilizes mineral trioxide aggregate (MTA) as the dressing material, followed by calcium hydroxide. While other calcium-silicate-based cements have been suggested for pulpotomy, there is a limited number of studies evaluating their long-term effectiveness.
OBJECTIVES
The objective of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to evaluate the success rate of pulpotomies performed on permanent teeth, comparing the use of ProRoot MTA with that of calcium hydroxide and other bioceramic materials.
METHODS
A comprehensive search was conducted in several electronic databases, including PubMed, Cochrane Library, Scopus, Web of Science, Embase and Science Direct until December 2022. The search was guided by PICOS criteria, including only randomized clinical trials (RCTs) that evaluated the success rate of pulpotomy treatments in permanent teeth using ProRoot MTA in comparison to calcium hydroxide and other bioceramic materials. The quality of the included studies was assessed using the RoB-2 tool to evaluate the risk of bias, and relevant data were extracted and analysed in RevMan software 5.3 using fixed-effect models. The GRADE tool was used to determine the overall quality of evidence.
RESULTS
The initial search retrieved 1072 studies and, after eliminating duplicates, 677 studies were screened and 28 studies were considered for eligibility. In the final selection process, 16 studies were included in the systematic review, with 10 being determined as having a high risk of bias. Pulpotomy showed an overall mean success rate of 92% after 1 year. The meta-analysis indicated a significantly higher success rate for pulpotomies utilizing MTA in comparison with calcium hydroxide, while no significant difference was seen between MTA and calcium-enriched mixture (CEM) or Biodentine. The GRADE assessment revealed an overall low level of evidence for the included studies.
DISCUSSION
Most randomized controlled trials exhibited a significant absence of control over confounding factors.
CONCLUSIONS
This systematic review and meta-analysis demonstrate that pulpotomy is a highly effective treatment for managing permanent teeth. The results indicate that the success rate of pulpotomy using ProRoot MTA is significantly higher than when using calcium hydroxide. However, the certainty of evidence supporting these findings is low, and there is a need for well-designed RCTs to assess the long-term outcomes of pulpotomy using newer bioceramic materials.
REGISTRATION
This systematic review was registered in the PROSPERO database (registration number CRD42023393970).
Topics: Humans; Calcium Hydroxide; Pulpotomy; Calcium; Aluminum Compounds; Drug Combinations; Oxides; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Calcium Compounds; Treatment Outcome; Silicates
PubMed: 37254176
DOI: 10.1111/iej.13939