A PHP Error was encountered

Severity: Warning

Message: file_get_contents(https://...@remsenmedia.com&api_key=81853a771c3a3a2c6b2553a65bc33b056f08&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests

Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php

Line Number: 176

Backtrace:

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 176
Function: file_get_contents

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 250
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 1034
Function: getPubMedXML

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3152
Function: GetPubMedArticleOutput_2016

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 575
Function: pubMedSearch_Global

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 489
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword

File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 316
Function: require_once

Is non-cavitated proximal lesion sealing an effective method for caries control in primary and permanent teeth? A systematic review and meta-analysis. | LitMetric

Objectives: The aim of this study was to perform a systematic review and meta-analysis on the effectiveness of sealing non-cavitated proximal caries lesions in primary and permanent teeth.

Data: Only controlled clinical trials and randomized controlled clinical trials that evaluated the effectiveness of sealing on non-cavitated proximal caries with a minimum follow-up of 12 months were included in the study. The primary outcome should be arrestment/progression of proximal caries evaluated by bitewing radiographs. A risk of bias evaluation based on the Cochrane Collaboration common scheme for bias was carried out for each study. The meta-analysis was performed on the studies considered low risk of bias and with pair-wise visual reading results through RevMan software.

Sources: A comprehensive search was performed in the Systematic Electronic Databases: Pubmed, Cochrane Library, Scopus, IBI Web of Science, Lilacs, SIGLE, and on website Clinical trials.gov, through until June 2013.

Study Selection: From 967 studies identified, 10 articles and 3 studies with partial results were assessed for eligibility. However three articles were excluded and our final sample included 10 studies. According to the risk of bias evaluation, six studies were considered "high" risk of bias, and four "low" risk of bias. The forest plot of the meta-analysis showed low heterogeneity (I(2)=29%) and a favourable outcome for the Infiltrant. The chance of caries progression when this technique was used was significantly lower (p=0.002) compared with Placebo.

Conclusion: Our results suggest that the technique of sealing non-cavitated proximal caries seems to be effective in controlling proximal caries in the short and medium term. Further long-term randomized clinical trials are still necessary to increase this evidence.

Clinical Significance: Contemporary dentistry is focused in minimally invasive approaches that prevent the destruction of sound dental tissues next to carious lesions. This paper searches for evidence of the efficacy of sealing/infiltrating non-cavitated proximal caries in arresting caries progression both in permanent and primary teeth.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jdent.2014.07.015DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

proximal caries
24
non-cavitated proximal
20
risk bias
20
sealing non-cavitated
12
clinical trials
12
caries
9
primary permanent
8
systematic review
8
review meta-analysis
8
effectiveness sealing
8

Similar Publications

Want AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?

Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!