BACKGROUND: Studies have suggested that in the presence of approximal cavities, the approximal surface in contact with this one shows a higher risk in the development of caries lesions. AIM: To evaluate the ability of dental materials to prevent and to arrest caries lesion in approximal surfaces in contact with occlusoproximal restorations. DESIGN: Two independent reviewers performed a literature search in PubMed through November 2014. The inclusion criteria were: (1) subject related to the scope of this systematic review, (2) study with follow-up, (3) not performed in specific groups, (4) to have a comparison group. After selection by title and abstract, potentially eligible articles were read in full. Meta-analysis was carried out considering the outcome as caries lesion progression or arrestment. RESULTS: The search strategy identified 772 potentially relevant studies, and 10 of them were included in the review (six laboratory studies and four longitudinal trials). For the longitudinal clinical trials, no difference was verified among the materials (OR = 0.680,95%CI:0.233-1.983). When a meta-analysis was performed for laboratory studies, GIC was significantly associated with better ability to arrest caries lesions (OR = 0.153,95%CI:0.060-0.391). CONCLUSIONS: In laboratory studies, GIC shows better ability to arrest caries lesion in approximal adjacent surfaces, but this ability was not confirmed in longitudinal clinical trials.
BACKGROUND: Studies have suggested that in the presence of approximal cavities, the approximal surface in contact with this one shows a higher risk in the development of caries lesions. AIM: To evaluate the ability of dental materials to prevent and to arrest caries lesion in approximal surfaces in contact with occlusoproximal restorations. DESIGN: Two independent reviewers performed a literature search in PubMed through November 2014. The inclusion criteria were: (1) subject related to the scope of this systematic review, (2) study with follow-up, (3) not performed in specific groups, (4) to have a comparison group. After selection by title and abstract, potentially eligible articles were read in full. Meta-analysis was carried out considering the outcome as caries lesion progression or arrestment. RESULTS: The search strategy identified 772 potentially relevant studies, and 10 of them were included in the review (six laboratory studies and four longitudinal trials). For the longitudinal clinical trials, no difference was verified among the materials (OR = 0.680,95%CI:0.233-1.983). When a meta-analysis was performed for laboratory studies, GIC was significantly associated with better ability to arrest caries lesions (OR = 0.153,95%CI:0.060-0.391). CONCLUSIONS: In laboratory studies, GIC shows better ability to arrest caries lesion in approximal adjacent surfaces, but this ability was not confirmed in longitudinal clinical trials.
Authors: Candice A Bellis; Owen Addison; Angela H Nobbs; Peter F Duckworth; James A Holder; Michele E Barbour Journal: Dent Mater Date: 2018-09-21 Impact factor: 5.304