Suppr超能文献

比较两种基于视觉标准的临床方法,用于评估恒牙后牙继发龋并做出治疗决策。

Comparison of two clinical approaches based on visual criteria for secondary caries assessments and treatment decisions in permanent posterior teeth.

机构信息

Graduate Program in Dentistry, School of Dentistry, Federal University of Pelotas, Rua Gonçalves Chaves, 457, Pelotas, RS, 96015-560, Brazil.

Department of Restorative Dentistry, School of Dentistry, Uniavan University Center, Av. Marginal Leste, 3600, Balneário Camboriú, SC, 88339-125, Brazil.

出版信息

BMC Oral Health. 2022 Mar 18;22(1):77. doi: 10.1186/s12903-022-02112-6.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

This cross-sectional study aimed to compare two clinical approaches based on visual criteria for secondary caries assessments and treatment decisions in permanent posterior teeth.

METHODS

The two clinical visual criteria tested for the assessments of restored teeth were: FDI criteria-based on the caries presence, marginal adaptation and staining criteria, adapted from the FDI (International Dental Federation) criteria and CARS criteria-"Caries Associated with Restorations or Sealants" (CARS) criteria described by the International Caries Classification and Management System. Adults were randomized according to the criteria. One calibrated examiner assessed the restorations and assigned the treatment according to the criteria. The primary outcome was replacement indication.

RESULTS

A total of 185 patients were included, totalling 718 restorations. The strongest correlation founded between the methods was for the presence of caries lesions (Rho = 0.829). A moderate correlation (Rho = 0.420) was founded between the treatment decisions proposed by the CARS and by the FDI criteria. The multilevel regression analysis showed that the FDI criteria indicated five times more replacements when compared to the CARS (< 0.001). Also, using the FDI criteria restorations were 2.7 times more related to caries around restorations (p < 0.001) compared to the other criterion.

CONCLUSIONS

The visual criteria used on the restoration's assessment directly influences the treatment decision to intervene or not on the restoration. The use of a minimally invasive based approach for assessing secondary caries may prevent overtreatment.

摘要

背景

本横断面研究旨在比较两种基于视觉标准的临床方法,用于评估和决策恒牙继发性龋病的治疗。

方法

本研究测试了两种用于评估修复牙的临床视觉标准:FDI 标准——基于龋病存在、边缘适应性和染色标准,改编自 FDI(国际牙科联合会)标准;CARS 标准——“与修复体或密封剂相关的龋病”(CARS)标准,由国际龋病分类和管理系统描述。根据标准对成年人进行随机分组。一位经过校准的检查者根据标准评估修复体并分配治疗方案。主要结局是替换指征。

结果

共纳入 185 名患者,总计 718 个修复体。发现两种方法之间相关性最强的是龋病病变的存在(Rho=0.829)。CARS 标准和 FDI 标准提出的治疗决策之间存在中度相关性(Rho=0.420)。多水平回归分析显示,与 CARS 标准相比,FDI 标准指示更换的可能性高出五倍(<0.001)。此外,与其他标准相比,使用 FDI 标准的修复体与修复体周围的龋病相关性更高(p<0.001)。

结论

用于评估修复体的视觉标准直接影响是否对修复体进行干预的治疗决策。使用基于微创方法评估继发性龋病可能有助于预防过度治疗。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/d0f3/8931988/dcf8ad74478b/12903_2022_2112_Fig1_HTML.jpg

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验