Suppr超能文献

窝沟封闭剂与氟化物漆预防儿童和青少年恒牙龋齿的比较

Pit and fissure sealants versus fluoride varnishes for preventing dental decay in the permanent teeth of children and adolescents.

作者信息

Ahovuo-Saloranta Anneli, Forss Helena, Hiiri Anne, Nordblad Anne, Mäkelä Marjukka

机构信息

Finnish Office for Health Technology Assessment (FinOHTA), National Institute for Health and Welfare (THL), Finn-Medi 3, Biokatu 10, Tampere, Finland, FI-33520.

出版信息

Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2016 Jan 18;2016(1):CD003067. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD003067.pub4.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Most of the detected increment in dental caries among children and adolescents is confined to occlusal surfaces of posterior permanent molars. Dental sealants and fluoride varnishes are much used preventive options for caries. Although the effectiveness of sealants and fluoride varnishes for controlling caries as compared with no intervention has been demonstrated in clinical trials and summarised in systematic reviews, the relative effectiveness of these two interventions remains unclear. This review is an update of one first published in 2006 and last updated in 2010.

OBJECTIVES

Primary objective • To evaluate the relative effectiveness of fissure sealants compared with fluoride varnishes, or fissure sealants together with fluoride varnishes compared with fluoride varnishes alone, for preventing dental caries in the occlusal surfaces of permanent teeth of children and adolescents. Secondary objectives • To evaluate whether effectiveness is influenced by sealant material type and length of follow-up.• To document and report on data concerning adverse events associated with sealants and fluoride varnishes.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the following electronic databases: the Cochrane Oral Health Group Trials Register (to 18 December 2015), the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (2015, Issue 11), MEDLINE via Ovid (1946 to 18 December 2015) and EMBASE via Ovid (1980 to 18 December 2015). We also searched the US National Institutes of Health Trials Register (http://clinicaltrials.gov) and the World Health Organization (WHO) Clinical Trials Registry Platform for ongoing trials. We placed no restrictions on language or date of publication when searching electronic databases. We screened the reference lists of identified trials and review articles for additional relevant studies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials with at least 12 months of follow-up comparing fissure sealants, or fissure sealants together with fluoride varnishes, versus fluoride varnishes for preventing caries in the occlusal surfaces of permanent premolar or molar teeth, in participants younger than 20 years of age at the start of the study.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently screened search results, extracted data and assessed risk of bias of included studies. We attempted to contact study authors to obtain missing or unclear information.We grouped and analysed studies on the basis of sealant material type (resin-based sealant and glass ionomer-based sealant: glass ionomer and resin-modified glass ionomer) and different follow-up periods. We calculated the odds ratio (OR) for caries or no caries on occlusal surfaces of permanent molar teeth. For trials with a split-mouth design, we used the Becker-Balagtas odds ratio. For continuous outcomes and data, we used means and standard deviations to obtain mean differences. We presented all measures with 95% confidence intervals (CIs).We assessed the quality of the evidence using GRADE (Grades of Recommendation, Assessment, Development and Evaluation) methods.We conducted meta-analysis using the fixed-effect model, as data from only two studies were combined. We had planned to conduct meta-analyses using a random-effects model when more than three trials were included in the meta-analysis.

MAIN RESULTS

In this review, we included eight trials with 1746 participants (four of the trials were new since the 2010 update). Seven trials (1127 participants) contributed to the analyses, and children involved were five to 10 years of age at the start of the trial. Sealant versus fluoride varnish Resin-based fissure sealants compared with fluoride varnishes Four trials evaluated this comparison (three of them contributing to the analyses). Compared with fluoride varnish, resin-based sealants prevented more caries in first permanent molars at two-year follow-up (two studies in the meta-analysis with pooled odds ratio (OR) 0.69, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.50 to 0.94; P value = 0.02; I(2) = 0%; 358 children evaluated). We assessed the body of evidence as low quality. The caries-preventive benefit for sealants was maintained at longer follow-up in one trial at high risk of bias: 26.6% of sealant teeth and 55.8% of fluoride-varnished teeth had developed caries when 75 children were evaluated at nine years of follow-up. Glass ionomer-based sealants compared with fluoride varnishes Three trials evaluated this comparison: one trial with chemically cured glass ionomer and two with resin-modified glass ionomer. Researchers reported similar caries increment between study groups regardless of which glass ionomer material was used in a trial. Study designs were clinically diverse, and meta-analysis could not be conducted. The body of evidence was assessed as of very low quality. Sealant together with fluoride varnish versus fluoride varnish alone One split-mouth trial analysing 92 children at two-year follow-up found a significant difference in favour of resin-based fissure sealant together with fluoride varnish compared with fluoride varnish only (OR 0.30, 95% CI 0.17 to 0.55). The body of evidence was assessed as low quality. Adverse events Three trials (two with resin-based sealant material and one with resin-modified glass ionomer) reported that no adverse events resulted from use of sealants or fluoride varnishes. The other five studies did not mention adverse events.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Currently, scarce and clinically diverse data are available on the comparison of sealants and fluoride varnish applications; therefore it is not possible to draw clear conclusions about possible differences in effectiveness for preventing or controlling dental caries on occlusal surfaces of permanent molars. The conclusions of this updated review remain the same as those of the last update (in 2010). We found some low-quality evidence suggesting the superiority of resin-based fissure sealants over fluoride varnish applications for preventing occlusal caries in permanent molars, and other low-quality evidence for benefits of resin-based sealant and fluoride varnish over fluoride varnish alone. Regarding glass ionomer sealant versus fluoride varnish comparisons, we assessed the quality of the evidence as very low and could draw no conclusions.

摘要

背景

在儿童和青少年中,多数龋齿检测增量局限于恒牙后磨牙的咬合面。窝沟封闭剂和氟化物漆是常用的龋齿预防方法。尽管在临床试验中已证实窝沟封闭剂和氟化物漆与不干预相比在控制龋齿方面的有效性,并在系统评价中进行了总结,但这两种干预措施的相对有效性仍不明确。本综述是对2006年首次发表、2010年最后更新的一篇综述的更新。

目的

主要目的 • 评估窝沟封闭剂与氟化物漆相比,或窝沟封闭剂联合氟化物漆与单独使用氟化物漆相比,在预防儿童和青少年恒牙咬合面龋齿方面的相对有效性。次要目的 • 评估有效性是否受封闭剂材料类型和随访时间的影响。• 记录并报告与窝沟封闭剂和氟化物漆相关的不良事件数据。

检索方法

我们检索了以下电子数据库:Cochrane口腔健康组试验注册库(截至2015年12月18日)、Cochrane对照试验中心注册库(CENTRAL)(2015年第11期)、通过Ovid检索的MEDLINE(1946年至2015年12月18日)以及通过Ovid检索的EMBASE(1980年至2015年12月18日)。我们还检索了美国国立卫生研究院试验注册库(http://clinicaltrials.gov)和世界卫生组织(WHO)临床试验注册平台以查找正在进行的试验。在检索电子数据库时,我们对语言或出版日期没有限制。我们筛选了已识别试验和综述文章的参考文献列表以查找其他相关研究。

入选标准

我们纳入了至少随访12个月的随机对照试验,比较窝沟封闭剂,或窝沟封闭剂联合氟化物漆,与氟化物漆在预防20岁以下研究开始时参与者恒牙前磨牙或磨牙咬合面龋齿方面的效果。

数据收集与分析

两位综述作者独立筛选检索结果、提取数据并评估纳入研究的偏倚风险。我们试图联系研究作者以获取缺失或不明确的信息。我们根据封闭剂材料类型(树脂基封闭剂和玻璃离子体基封闭剂:玻璃离子体和树脂改性玻璃离子体)和不同随访期对研究进行分组和分析。我们计算了恒牙磨牙咬合面龋齿或无龋齿的比值比(OR)。对于采用分口设计的试验,我们使用Becker - Balagtas比值比。对于连续结局和数据,我们使用均值和标准差来获得均值差。我们给出了所有测量值的95%置信区间(CI)。我们使用GRADE(推荐分级、评估、制定和评价)方法评估证据质量。由于仅合并了两项研究的数据,我们使用固定效应模型进行荟萃分析。当荟萃分析纳入三项以上试验时,我们计划使用随机效应模型进行荟萃分析。

主要结果

在本综述中,我们纳入了八项试验,共1746名参与者(其中四项试验是2010年更新后新增的)。七项试验(1127名参与者)纳入分析,试验开始时涉及的儿童年龄为5至10岁。封闭剂与氟化物漆 树脂基窝沟封闭剂与氟化物漆 四项试验评估了这种比较(其中三项纳入分析)。与氟化物漆相比,树脂基封闭剂在两年随访时预防第一恒磨牙龋齿的效果更好(荟萃分析中的两项研究,合并比值比(OR)为0.69,95%置信区间(CI)为0.50至0.94;P值 = 0.02;I² = 0%;评估了358名儿童)。我们将证据质量评估为低质量。在一项偏倚风险高的试验中,封闭剂预防龋齿的益处持续到更长随访期:在九年随访评估75名儿童时,26.6%的封闭剂处理牙齿和55.8%的氟化物漆处理牙齿发生了龋齿。玻璃离子体基封闭剂与氟化物漆 三项试验评估了这种比较:一项试验使用化学固化玻璃离子体,两项试验使用树脂改性玻璃离子体。无论试验中使用哪种玻璃离子体材料,研究人员报告研究组之间龋齿增量相似。研究设计在临床上具有多样性,无法进行荟萃分析。证据质量评估为极低质量。封闭剂联合氟化物漆与单独使用氟化物漆 一项分口试验在两年随访时分析了92名儿童,发现与仅使用氟化物漆相比,树脂基窝沟封闭剂联合氟化物漆有显著差异(OR 0.30,95% CI 0.17至0.55)。证据质量评估为低质量。不良事件 三项试验(两项使用树脂基封闭剂材料,一项使用树脂改性玻璃离子体)报告使用封闭剂或氟化物漆未导致不良事件。其他五项研究未提及不良事件。

作者结论

目前,关于窝沟封闭剂和氟化物漆应用比较的可用数据稀缺且在临床上具有多样性;因此,无法就预防或控制恒牙磨牙咬合面龋齿的有效性可能差异得出明确结论。本次更新综述的结论与上次更新(2010年)相同。我们发现一些低质量证据表明树脂基窝沟封闭剂在预防恒牙磨牙咬合面龋齿方面优于氟化物漆应用,以及其他低质量证据表明树脂基封闭剂和氟化物漆联合使用优于单独使用氟化物漆。关于玻璃离子体封闭剂与氟化物漆的比较,我们将证据质量评估为极低,无法得出结论。

相似文献

1
Pit and fissure sealants versus fluoride varnishes for preventing dental decay in the permanent teeth of children and adolescents.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2016 Jan 18;2016(1):CD003067. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD003067.pub4.
2
Pit and fissure sealants versus fluoride varnishes for preventing dental decay in the permanent teeth of children and adolescents.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2020 Nov 4;11(11):CD003067. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD003067.pub5.
3
Pit and fissure sealants for preventing dental decay in permanent teeth.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2017 Jul 31;7(7):CD001830. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD001830.pub5.
4
Pit and fissure sealants versus fluoride varnishes for preventing dental decay in children and adolescents.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2006 Oct 18(4):CD003067. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD003067.pub2.
5
Sealants for preventing dental caries in primary teeth.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2022 Feb 11;2(2):CD012981. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD012981.pub2.
6
Pit and fissure sealants for preventing dental decay in the permanent teeth of children and adolescents.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2004(3):CD001830. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD001830.pub2.
7
Pit and fissure sealants versus fluoride varnishes for preventing dental decay in children and adolescents.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2010 Mar 17(3):CD003067. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD003067.pub3.
8
Atraumatic restorative treatment versus conventional restorative treatment for managing dental caries.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2017 Dec 28;12(12):CD008072. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD008072.pub2.
9
Fluoride mouthrinses for preventing dental caries in children and adolescents.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2016 Jul 29;7(7):CD002284. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD002284.pub2.
10
Slow-release fluoride devices for the control of dental decay.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2018 Mar 1;3(3):CD005101. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD005101.pub4.

引用本文的文献

1
Factors influencing the retention rate of resin based pit and fissure sealant among primary school children- A randomised clinical trial.
J Oral Biol Craniofac Res. 2025 Nov-Dec;15(6):1347-1353. doi: 10.1016/j.jobcr.2025.08.010. Epub 2025 Aug 20.
2
Role of the Early Detection and Prevention of Dental Caries in Children: A Systematic Review of Clinical Outcomes.
Cureus. 2025 Jun 1;17(6):e85185. doi: 10.7759/cureus.85185. eCollection 2025 Jun.
3
Technological dental sealants: in vitro evaluation of material properties and antibiofilm potential.
BMC Oral Health. 2025 Feb 1;25(1):171. doi: 10.1186/s12903-024-05303-5.
4
Glass ionomer fissure sealants versus fluoride varnish application on children's behaviour: a randomised controlled trial.
Eur Arch Paediatr Dent. 2025 Apr;26(2):233-245. doi: 10.1007/s40368-024-00952-0. Epub 2024 Nov 4.
5
Prevention of occlusal caries using Vanish XT: an 18-month follow-up randomized clinical trial.
BMC Oral Health. 2024 Nov 1;24(1):1328. doi: 10.1186/s12903-024-05095-8.
6
Survival Analysis of Glass Ionomer Cement and Resin-Based Sealant Retention: A 10-Year Follow-Up Study.
Medicina (Kaunas). 2024 May 1;60(5):756. doi: 10.3390/medicina60050756.
7
Research interest on dental sealant in dentistry based on the 100 most cited articles: bibliometric analysis.
Braz Oral Res. 2024 May 13;38:e044. doi: 10.1590/1807-3107bor-2024.vol38.0044. eCollection 2024.
8
Fissure Sealants or Fluoride Varnish? A Randomized Pragmatic Split-Mouth Trial.
J Dent Res. 2024 Jul;103(7):705-711. doi: 10.1177/00220345241248630. Epub 2024 May 8.
9
Does the Modality of Dental Treatment Affect the Treatment Prognosis and the Necessity of Re-Treatments?
Children (Basel). 2023 Oct 19;10(10):1705. doi: 10.3390/children10101705.

本文引用的文献

2
Micro-invasive interventions for managing proximal dental decay in primary and permanent teeth.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2015 Nov 5;2015(11):CD010431. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD010431.pub2.
3
Priority oral health research identification for clinical decision-making.
Evid Based Dent. 2015 Sep;16(3):69-71. doi: 10.1038/sj.ebd.6401110.
4
Clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of fissure sealants in children and adolescents with a high caries risk.
GMS Health Technol Assess. 2014 Oct 1;10:Doc02. doi: 10.3205/hta000118. eCollection 2014.
5
Fluoride varnishes for preventing dental caries in children and adolescents.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2013 Jul 11;2013(7):CD002279. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD002279.pub2.
6
Sealants for preventing dental decay in the permanent teeth.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2013 Mar 28(3):CD001830. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD001830.pub4.
7
The non-operative resin treatment of proximal caries lesions.
Dent Update. 2012 Nov;39(9):614-6, 618-20, 622. doi: 10.12968/denu.2012.39.9.614.
9
Randomized trial on fluorides and sealants for fissure caries prevention.
J Dent Res. 2012 Aug;91(8):753-8. doi: 10.1177/0022034512452278. Epub 2012 Jun 26.
10
Adjunct methods for caries detection: a systematic review of literature.
Acta Odontol Scand. 2013 May-Jul;71(3-4):388-97. doi: 10.3109/00016357.2012.690448. Epub 2012 May 28.

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验