-
Caries Research 2020For an Organisation for Caries Research/European Federation of Conservative Dentistry consensus, this systematic review is aimed to assess the question of how to manage...
For an Organisation for Caries Research/European Federation of Conservative Dentistry consensus, this systematic review is aimed to assess the question of how to manage the caries process in the case of early childhood caries (ECC). Medline via PubMed was searched systematically regarding management of ECC. First priority was existing systematic reviews or randomized clinical trials otherwise cohort studies dealing with management of ECC, primarily with carious anterior teeth. After data extraction, the potential risk of bias was estimated depending on the study types, and the level of evidence was evaluated. Regarding management of ECC, results are presented for silver diamine fluoride (SDF, n = 5), nonoperative caries management (NOCM, n = 10), and restorative approaches (RA, n = 8) separately, as different kinds of studies with different levels of evidence were found for the different aspects in the management of ECC. The 5 systematic reviews on SDF showed a high potential for arrest of ECC on a high level of evidence. In NOCM, a low level of evidence for a moderate effect of fluoride varnish in arresting or remineralizing, especially non-cavitated lesions, was assessed. For RA in carious anterior upper primary teeth, a low level of evidence was found for higher failure rates of glass ionomer cement and composite fillings than composite strip crowns even if placed under general anaesthesia and especially compared to other crowns (stainless steel and zirconia). In conclusions, ECC may be managed successfully with nonoperative (SDF, regular fluoride application) and moderately well with operative approaches, but the decision is affected by many other variables such as pulpal involvement, the child's cooperation, or a general anaesthesia setting.
Topics: Child; Child, Preschool; Crowns; Dental Caries; Fluorides; Fluorides, Topical; Glass Ionomer Cements; Humans; Research Design
PubMed: 31910415
DOI: 10.1159/000504335 -
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 -
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 -
Caries Research 2019The aim of this review as part of the preparation for a workshop organized by the European Federation of Conservative Dentistry (EFCD) in conjunction with the European... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
The aim of this review as part of the preparation for a workshop organized by the European Federation of Conservative Dentistry (EFCD) in conjunction with the European Organisation for Caries Research (ORCA) was to systematically analyze available evidence of non-, micro- as well as invasive interventions for root caries lesions (RCLs). For each treatment strategy, a separate systematic review was either performed (micro-invasive and choice of restorative material) or updated (non-invasive and excavation technique) each of them following PRISMA guidelines, and if possible meta-analyses were performed. Besides the general advice to improve tooth brushing with fluoride toothpaste main findings for non-invasive interventions in RCLs, the use of dentifrices containing 5,000 ppm F- as well as professionally applied chlorhexidine varnish or silver diamine fluoride seemed to be more efficacious to arrest root caries compared to conventional fluoride toothpaste or placebo respectively. However, this conclusion is based only on a few randomized clinical trials. For micro-invasive treatments, only 2 studies focusing on sealants were available without clear conclusions. A recent review on the comparison of atraumatic restorative treatment compared with conventional treatment concluded that there is insufficient data to clearly rule out if any difference with regard to restoration longevity between both techniques exists. When restoring coventionally, composites performed better than resin-modified and glass ionomer cements. However, all materials showed rather high annual failure rates in the majority of the studies and evidence is based on a low number of prospective studies with a rather high risk of bias.
Topics: Dental Atraumatic Restorative Treatment; Dentifrices; Glass Ionomer Cements; Humans; Prospective Studies; Root Caries
PubMed: 31412343
DOI: 10.1159/000501588 -
Heliyon May 2020Restoring noncarious cervical lesions are challenging to clinical practice. This study aimed to compare the clinical performance/longevity of glass ionomer cements (GIC)...
OBJECTIVE
Restoring noncarious cervical lesions are challenging to clinical practice. This study aimed to compare the clinical performance/longevity of glass ionomer cements (GIC) and composite resins (CR) used for noncarious cervical lesions (NCCL) through a systematic review and meta-analysis (MA).
DATA
Randomized and controlled clinical trials and nonrandomized clinical trials, which compared the clinical performance/longevity of CR and GIC (conventional and/or resin-modified) in the treatment of NCCL, were included.
SOURCE
The methodological quality and risk of bias were evaluated using the Cochrane Collaboration tool. Seven MAs were performed considering (1) the clinical performance of the parameters in common: retention, marginal discoloration, marginal adaptation, secondary caries, color, anatomic form, surface texture and (2) a follow-up time of 12, 24 and 36 months. The prevalence of successful restorations and the total number of restorations per clinical parameter/follow-up time were used to calculate the relative risk (95% CI).
STUDY SELECTION
After screening of the studies, 13 studies were used for quantitative synthesis. The risk difference (CI 95%, α, I) between GIC and CR for anatomic form was 0.00 (-0.02, 0.02; p = 0.83; 0%); for color was -0.02 (-0.08, 0.04; p = 0.48; 80%); for surface texture was -0.02 (-0.06, 0.02; p = 0.31; 63%); for secondary caries was -0.00 (-0.01, 0.01; p = 0.87; 0%); for marginal discoloration was 0.01 (-0.01, 0.03; p = 0.23; 3%); for marginal adaptation was 0.01 (-0.01, 0.04; p = 0.34; 32%) and for retention was 0.07 (0.02, 0.12; p = 0.003; 76%).
CONCLUSION
GIC showed a clinical performance significantly higher than CR in regard to retention, whereas for the other parameters, GIC was similar to CR.
CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE
NCCLs is increasingly prevalent among the population and this type of lesion causing defects in the tooth that affect not only aesthetics but also everyday habits, such as drinking, eating and teeth brushing, due to the sensitivity these lesions cause.
PubMed: 32462087
DOI: 10.1016/j.heliyon.2020.e03969 -
Caries Research 2019To investigate whether silver diamine fluoride (SDF) is effective in preventing new caries lesions in primary teeth when compared to placebo or active treatments. (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
OBJECTIVES
To investigate whether silver diamine fluoride (SDF) is effective in preventing new caries lesions in primary teeth when compared to placebo or active treatments.
METHODS
Systematic review (CRD42016036963) of controlled clinical trials. Searches were performed in 9 electronic databases, 5 registers of ongoing trials, and reference lists of identified review articles. Two researchers carried out data extraction and quality appraisal independently. The primary outcome was the difference in caries increment (decayed, missing, and filled surfaces or teeth - dmfs or dmft) between SDF and control groups. These differences were pooled as weighted mean differences (WMD) and prevented fractions (PF).
RESULTS
Searches yielded 2,366 unique records; 6 reports of 4 trials that randomized 1,118 and analyzed 915 participants were included. Two trials compared SDF to no treatment, 1 compared SDF to placebo and sodium fluoride varnish (FV), and 1 compared SDF to high-viscosity glass ionomer cement (GIC). All studies had at least 1 domain with unclear or high risk of bias. After 24 months of follow-up, in comparison to placebo, no treatment, and FV, SDF applications significantly reduced the development of new dentin caries lesions (placebo or no treatment: WMD = -1.15, PF = 77.5%; FV: WMD = -0.43, PF = 54.0%). GIC was more effective than SDF after 12 months of follow-up but the difference between them was not statistically significant (WMD, dmft: 0.34, PF: -6.09%).
CONCLUSION
When applied to caries lesions in primary teeth, SDF compared to no treatment, placebo or FV appears to effectively prevent dental caries in the entire dentition. However, trials specifically designed to assess this outcome are needed.
Topics: Cariostatic Agents; Child; Child, Preschool; Controlled Clinical Trials as Topic; Dental Caries; Fluorides, Topical; Follow-Up Studies; Glass Ionomer Cements; Humans; Inflammation; Quaternary Ammonium Compounds; Silver Compounds; Sodium Fluoride; Taste Disorders; Tooth Discoloration; Tooth, Deciduous
PubMed: 29874642
DOI: 10.1159/000488686 -
Journal of Indian Prosthodontic Society 2018This systematic review aimed to evaluate retention failures in cement- and screw-retained fixed restorations on dental implants in partially edentulous arches. (Review)
Review
PURPOSE
This systematic review aimed to evaluate retention failures in cement- and screw-retained fixed restorations on dental implants in partially edentulous arches.
METHODS
The relevant articles were retrieved from MEDLINE (PubMed), Cochrane Library, and EBSCO electronic databases for articles published from January 1995 to January 2016 and were restricted to randomized controlled trials and retrospective and prospective studies on human subjects that were reported in English. A further hand search was conducted on individual journals and reference list of the articles found. Reviewed studies which reported retention failures in fixed implant-supported prostheses using screw and cement retention mechanism. Information on the type and nature of restoration, as well as different luting cement, were also collected.
RESULTS
Thirty-three articles were finalized, 20 short-term clinical studies (up to 5 years) and 13 long-term studies (≥5 years). Out of 33 studies, 16 studies were included in meta-analysis, 8 in short-term and 8 in long-term studies. The results of the meta-analysis for short-term studies showed statistically significant difference between cement-retained and screw-retained prosthesis, with the forest plot favoring cement-retained prostheses (risk ratio [RR]: 0.26; confidence interval [CI]: 0.09-0.74; < 0.0001; = 79%). In long-term studies, the forest plot revealed statistically significant difference between both retention systems favoring cement-retained prostheses (RR: 0.31; CI: 0.13-0.76; = 0.03; = 56%).
CONCLUSION
Analysis of the short- and long-term studies shows lesser retention failures with cement-retained prostheses when compared to screw-retained prostheses. Further, multicentric, high-quality randomized controlled studies with long-term observations and modified cementation protocols can yield higher grades of recommendation to avoid retention failures.
PubMed: 30111908
DOI: 10.4103/jips.jips_25_18 -
Dentistry Journal Sep 2023Dental cements are in a constant state of evolution, adapting to better align with the intricacies of tooth structure and the dynamic movements within the oral cavity.... (Review)
Review
Dental cements are in a constant state of evolution, adapting to better align with the intricacies of tooth structure and the dynamic movements within the oral cavity. This study aims to evaluate the efficacy of zirconia-reinforced glass ionomer cement-an innovative variant of modified glass ionomer cements-in terms of its ability to withstand compressive forces and prevent microleakage during dental caries reconstruction. An extensive search was conducted across various databases, encompassing PubMed-MEDLINE, Scopus, Embase, Google Scholar, prominent journals, unpublished studies, conference proceedings, and cross-referenced sources. The selected studies underwent meticulous scrutiny according to predetermined criteria, followed by the assessment of quality and the determination of evidence levels. In total, 16 studies were incorporated into this systematic review and network meta-analysis (NMA). The findings suggest that both compomer and giomer cements exhibit greater compressive strength and reduced microleakage values than zirconia-reinforced glass ionomer cement. In contrast, resin-modified glass ionomer cement (RMGIC) and high-viscosity glass ionomer cement (GIC) demonstrate less favorable performance in these regards when compared with zirconia-reinforced glass ionomer cement.
PubMed: 37754331
DOI: 10.3390/dj11090211 -
National Journal of Maxillofacial... 2015Treatment of head and neck cancers (HNCs) involves radiotherapy. Patients undergoing radiotherapy for HNCs are prone to dental complications. Radiotherapy to the head... (Review)
Review
Treatment of head and neck cancers (HNCs) involves radiotherapy. Patients undergoing radiotherapy for HNCs are prone to dental complications. Radiotherapy to the head and neck region causes xerostomia and salivary gland dysfunction which dramatically increases the risk of dental caries and its sequelae. Radiation therapy (RT) also affects the dental hard tissues increasing their susceptibility to demineralization following RT. Postradiation caries is a rapidly progressing and highly destructive type of dental caries. Radiation-related caries and other dental hard tissue changes can appear within the first 3 months following RT. Hence, every effort should be focused on prevention to manage patients with severe caries. This can be accomplished through good preoperative dental treatment, frequent dental evaluation and treatment after RT (with the exception of extractions), and consistent home care that includes self-applied fluoride. Restorative management of radiation caries can be challenging. The restorative dentist must consider the altered dental substrate and a hostile oral environment when selecting restorative materials. Radiation-induced changes in enamel and dentine may compromise bonding of adhesive materials. Consequently, glass ionomer cements have proved to be a better alternative to composite resins in irradiated patients. Counseling of patients before and after radiotherapy can be done to make them aware of the complications of radiotherapy and thus can help in preventing them.
PubMed: 27390489
DOI: 10.4103/0975-5950.183870 -
Clinical Oral Investigations Oct 2023To compare the failure rates and the prevalence of technical complications between full-coverage tooth-supported monolithic zirconia (MZ) and porcelain-veneered zirconia... (Review)
Review
Clinical outcomes of tooth-supported monolithic zirconia vs. porcelain-veneered zirconia fixed dental prosthesis, with an additional focus on the cement type: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
PURPOSE
To compare the failure rates and the prevalence of technical complications between full-coverage tooth-supported monolithic zirconia (MZ) and porcelain-veneered zirconia (PVZ) fixed dental prosthesis, based on a systematic literature review.
METHODS
An electronic search was performed in three databases, supplemented by hand searching. Several statistical methods were used.
RESULTS
Seventy-four publications reported 6370 restorations (4264 PVZ; 2106 MZ; 8200 abutment teeth; 3549 patients), followed up until 152 months. A total of 216 prostheses failed, and survival was statistically significant different between groups. PVZ had higher occurrence of complications than MZ; the difference was especially greater for either minor or major chipping. The difference in prevalence of either minor or major chipping was statistically significant for PVZ prostheses between cementation with glass ionomer and adhesive resin cement (higher), adhesive resin and resin-modified glass ionomer cement (RMGIC, higher), and between RMGIC (higher) and glass ionomer cement. For MZ the difference was significant only for minor chipping between RMGIC (higher) and adhesive resin cement. Abutment teeth to PVZ prostheses more often lost vitality. Decementation was not observed with RMGIC. Air abrasion did not seem to clinically decrease the decementation risk. The 5-year difference in the occurrence of minor or major chipping between MZ and PVZ prostheses was statistically significant, but nor for catastrophic fracture.
CONCLUSION
Tooth-supported PVZ prostheses present higher failure and complication rates than MZ prosthesis. The difference in complications is striking when it comes to chipping.
CLINICAL RELEVANCE
Awareness of the outcome differences between different types of zirconia prostheses is important for clinical practice.
PubMed: 37626273
DOI: 10.1007/s00784-023-05219-4