Department of Paediatric Dentistry, School of Dentistry, National and Kapodistrian University of Athens, Athens, Greece.
Clinic of Orthodontics and Paediatric Dentistry, Center of Dental Medicine, University of Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland; Department of Orthodontics, School of Dentistry, National and Kapodistrian University of Athens, Athens, Greece; Private Practice, Athens, Greece.
J Dent. 2018 Oct;77:8-17. doi: 10.1016/j.jdent.2018.08.004. Epub 2018 Aug 6.
INTRODUCTION/OBJECTIVES: This systematic review aimed to critically appraise the evidence on resin infiltration for the clinical management of proximal caries lesions in primary and permanent teeth.
Search terms included resin infiltration, micro-invasive and proximal caries. Potentially eligible studies involved proximal caries lesions treated with resin infiltration. Risk of bias assessment was performed using the Cochrane risk of bias tool and the quality of evidence was assessed with GRADE.
Electronic Database search of published and unpublished literature was performed in April 22, 2018 within the following databases: MEDLINE via Pubmed, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, LILACS via BIREME, Open Grey, Clinical Trials.gov and National Research Register.
Of 135 articles initially retrieved, 10 were eligible for inclusion in the systematic review comprising the results of 9 studies, while 5 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) (6 articles) with unclear risk of bias contributed to the meta-analyses. Random effects meta-analyses were implemented and lesion progression treatment effects were estimated through Odds Ratios (ORs) along with associated 95% Confidence Intervals (95% CIs).
Overall, there was strong evidence that proximal caries lesion progression was less likely to occur in permanent teeth following treatment with resin infiltration plus oral hygiene measures as compared to non- invasive methods (oral hygiene instructions) for follow up 18 months to 2 years (3 studies: OR = 0.14; 95% CI: 0.08, 0.25; P < 0.001) as well as 3 years (4 studies: OR = 0.15; 95% CI: 0.06, 0.36; P < 0.001). The quality of the evidence was rated as moderate to low respectively.
介绍/目的:本系统评价旨在批判性地评估关于用于治疗乳牙和恒牙近中龋损的树脂渗透技术的临床证据。
搜索词包括树脂渗透、微创和近中龋。潜在的合格研究涉及用树脂渗透治疗近中龋损。使用 Cochrane 偏倚风险工具进行偏倚风险评估,并使用 GRADE 评估证据质量。
2018 年 4 月 22 日,在以下数据库中进行了已发表和未发表文献的电子数据库搜索:通过 Pubmed 搜索 MEDLINE、Cochrane 对照试验中心注册库、LILACS 通过 BIREME、Open Grey、ClinicalTrials.gov 和国家研究注册。
最初检索到的 135 篇文章中,有 10 篇符合纳入系统评价的标准,包括 9 项研究的结果,而 5 项随机对照试验(RCT)(6 篇文章)的偏倚风险不明确,对荟萃分析做出了贡献。实施了随机效应荟萃分析,并通过比值比(OR)及其相关 95%置信区间(95%CI)来估计病变进展的治疗效果。
总体而言,有强有力的证据表明,与非侵入性方法(口腔卫生指导)相比,在 18 个月至 2 年(3 项研究:OR=0.14;95%CI:0.08,0.25;P<0.001)和 3 年(4 项研究:OR=0.15;95%CI:0.06,0.36;P<0.001)的随访中,用树脂渗透加口腔卫生措施治疗恒牙近中龋损后,病变进展的可能性较小。证据质量分别评为中等到低。