Laboratory of Functional and Structural Biology, Institute of Biological Sciences, Federal University of Pará, Belém, Brazil.
Department of Pediatric Dentistry and Orthodontics, School of Dentistry, Federal University of Rio de Janeiro, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil.
Oxid Med Cell Longev. 2019 Jul 22;2019:9187978. doi: 10.1155/2019/9187978. eCollection 2019.
This systematic review with meta-analysis aimed to evaluate the effect of antioxidants as an adjuvant in periodontitis treatment. The following databases were consulted: PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, Cochrane, Lilacs, OpenGrey, and Google Scholar. Based on the PICO strategy, the inclusion criteria comprised interventional studies including periodontitis patients (participants) treated with conventional therapy and antioxidants (intervention) compared to patients treated only with conventional therapy (control) where the periodontal response (outcome) was evaluated. The risk of bias was evaluated using the Cochrane RoB tool (for randomized studies) and ROBINS-I tool (for nonrandomized studies). Quantitative data were analyzed in five random effects meta-analyses considering the following periodontal parameters: clinical attachment loss (CAL), plaque index (PI), gingival index (GI), bleeding on probing (BOP), and probing depth (PD). After all, the level of certainty was measured with the Grading of Recommendation, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) tool. Among the 1884 studies identified, only 15 interventional studies were according to the eligibility criteria and they were included in our review. From them, 4 articles presented a high risk of bias. The meta-analysis showed a statistically significant difference for CAL (SMD 0.29 (0.04, 0.55), = 0.03, = 13%), PI (SMD 0.41 (0.18, 0.64), = 0.0005, = 47%), and BOP (SMD 0.55 (0.27, 0.83), = 0.0001, = 0%). The GRADE tool showed a moderate to high certainty in the quality of evidence depending on the clinical parameter and antioxidants used. These results suggest that the use of antioxidants is an adjunct approach to nonsurgical periodontal therapy which may be helpful in controlling the periodontal status.
这篇系统评价和荟萃分析旨在评估抗氧化剂作为牙周炎治疗辅助手段的效果。我们检索了以下数据库:PubMed、Scopus、Web of Science、Cochrane、Lilacs、OpenGrey 和 Google Scholar。根据 PICO 策略,纳入标准包括:干预性研究,纳入接受常规治疗和抗氧化剂治疗(干预组)的牙周炎患者(参与者),与仅接受常规治疗(对照组)的患者进行比较,评估牙周反应(结局)。使用 Cochrane RoB 工具(用于随机研究)和 ROBINS-I 工具(用于非随机研究)评估偏倚风险。定量数据分析采用五项随机效应荟萃分析,考虑以下牙周参数:临床附着丧失(CAL)、菌斑指数(PI)、牙龈指数(GI)、探诊出血(BOP)和探诊深度(PD)。最后,使用推荐评估、制定与评价(GRADE)工具评估证据确定性水平。在确定的 1884 项研究中,只有 15 项干预性研究符合纳入标准,被纳入本综述。其中,有 4 项研究存在高偏倚风险。荟萃分析显示,CAL(SMD 0.29(0.04,0.55), = 0.03, = 13%)、PI(SMD 0.41(0.18,0.64), = 0.0005, = 47%)和 BOP(SMD 0.55(0.27,0.83), = 0.0001, = 0%)的差异具有统计学意义。GRADE 工具根据临床参数和使用的抗氧化剂,显示出证据质量的中等至高确定性。这些结果表明,抗氧化剂的使用是牙周非手术治疗的辅助方法,可能有助于控制牙周状况。