| Literature DB >> 34669177 |
N A Lygidakis1, E Garot2,3,4, C Somani5, G D Taylor6, P Rouas2,3,4, F S L Wong5.
Abstract
AIM: To update the existing European Academy of Paediatric Dentistry (EAPD) 2010 policy document on the 'Best Clinical Practice guidance for clinicians dealing with children presenting with Molar-Incisor-Hypomineralisation (MIH).'Entities:
Keywords: Aetiology; Clinical practice; EAPD; Guidelines; MIH; Molar incisor hypomineralisation; Policy document; Treatment
Mesh:
Year: 2021 PMID: 34669177 PMCID: PMC8926988 DOI: 10.1007/s40368-021-00668-5
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Eur Arch Paediatr Dent ISSN: 1818-6300
GRADE ratings and their interpretation
| Grades of evidence quality | Interpretation |
|---|---|
| High | We are very confident that the true effect lies close to that of the estimate of the effect |
| Moderate | We are moderately confident in the effect estimate: the true effect is likely to be close to the estimate of the effect, but there is a possibility that it is substantially different |
| Low | Our confidence in the effect estimate is limited: the true effect may be substantially different from the estimate of the effect |
| Very low | We have very little confidence in the effect estimate: the true effect is likely to be substantially different from the estimate of effect |
Table from the GRADE Handbook, available at: http://gdt.guidelinedevelopment.org/app/handbook/handbook.html#h.9rdbelsnu4iy
Strengths of recommendation for patients and clinicians
| Strong recommendation | Weak/Conditional recommendation | |
|---|---|---|
| For patients | Most people would want the recommended course of action and only a small proportion would not | Most people would want the recommended course of action, but many would not |
| For clinicians | Most patients should receive the recommended course of action | Different choices will be appropriate for different patients and each patient should be advised for a management decision consistent with her/his values and preferences |
Adapted from: Guyatt et al. GRADE Working Group. Rating quality of evidence and strength of recommendations: going from evidence to recommendations. BMJ.2008; 336:1049–51
EAPD Diagnostic criteria of MIH
(adopted from Weerheijm et al. 2003; Lygidakis et al. 2010)
| Diagnostic feature | Description of the defect |
|---|---|
| Teeth involved | One to all four permanent first molars (FPM) with enamel hypomineralisation Simultaneously, the permanent incisors can be affected At least one FPM has to be affected for a diagnosis of MIH The more affected the molars, the more incisors involved and the more severe the defects The defects may also be seen at the second primary molars, premolars, second permanent molars and the tip of the canines |
| Demarcated opacities | Clearly demarcated opacities presenting with an alteration in the translucency of the enamel Variability in colour, size and shape White, creamy or yellow to brownish colour Only defects greater than 1 mm should be considered |
| Post-eruptive enamel breakdown | Severely affected enamel breaks down following tooth eruption, due to masticatory forces Loss of the initially formed surface and variable degree of porosity of the remaining hypomineralised areas The loss is often associated with a pre-existing demarcated opacity Areas of exposed dentine and subsequent caries development |
| Sensitivity | Affected teeth frequently reveal sensitivity, ranging from mild response to external stimuli to spontaneous hypersensitivity MIH molars may be difficult to anesthetize |
| Atypical restorations | The size and shape of restorations are not conforming to the typical caries picture In molars the restorations are extended to the buccal or palatal/lingual smooth surface An opacity can be frequently noticed at the margins of the restorations First permanent molars and incisors with restorations having similar extensions as MIH opacities are recommended to be judged as that |
Extraction of molars due to MIH | Extracted teeth can be defined as having MIH when there are: - Relevant notes in the records - Demarcated opacities or atypical restorations on the other first molars - Typical demarcated opacities in the incisors |
Description of severity level according to the EAPD criteria
(adopted from Jälevik 2010; Lygidakis et al. 2010)
| Severity level | Signs and symptoms |
|---|---|
| Mild | Demarcated enamel opacities without enamel breakdown Induced sensitivity to external stimuli e.g., air/water but not brushing Mild aesthetic concerns on discolouration of the incisors |
| Severe | Demarcated enamel opacities with breakdown and caries Spontaneous and persistent hypersensitivity affecting function e.g., brushing, mastication Strong aesthetic concerns that may have socio-psychological impact |
Fig. 1MIH/HSPM clinical data short recording sheet and scoring details. Only teeth involved in MIH/HSPM and the relevant MIH characteristics are included (Ghanim et al. 2015)
Fig. 2MIH/HSPM clinical data long recording sheet and scoring details. Teeth involved in MIH/HSPM are highlighted grey. MIH and mDDE characteristics in all existing teeth are included (Ghanim et al. 2015)
Fig. 3World map of MIH prevalence at present
GRADE quality of evidence of included studies related to aetiology
| Aetiological factor (in alphabetical order) | No of studies | No of participants | No of participants with the factor | Quality of evidence |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Allergies | 6 | 2432 | 518 | Low |
| Antibiotics | 19 | 11,703a | 2330 | Low |
| Asthma | 14 | 8104a | 1227 | Low |
| Asthma drug | 5 | 3669 | 981 | Low |
| Breast feeding > 12 months | 8 | 8189 | 972 | Low |
| Breast feeding > 6 months | 7 | 4810 | 928 | Low |
| Bronchitis | 12 | 9473a | 1270 | Low |
| Caesarean | 17 | 10,886a | 2336 | Low |
| Celiac disease | 1 | 80 | 40 | Very low |
| Chicken pox | 14 | 9845 | 1437 | Very low |
| Diarrhoea | 7 | 6893 | 908 | Low |
| Eclampsia | 4 | 5409 | 592 | Low |
| Epigenetic (monozygotic twins) | 1 | 334 | 188 | High |
| Fever | 20 | 14,128a | 2408 | Low |
| Fluoride | 1 | 3233 | 2507 | Low |
| Gastric disorders | 8 | 6266 | 647 | Low |
| Genetic (SNP association) | 4 | 1456 | ND | High |
| Gestational diabetes | 4 | 1554 | 406 | Very low |
| Gestational hypertension | 9 | 7611 | 1009 | Low |
| Hypoxia at birth | 16 | 9867a | 1859 | Low |
| Incubator | 5 | 5628 | 702 | Moderate |
| Jaundice | 4 | 1220 | 220 | Very low |
| Kidney diseases | 7 | 3758 | 754 | Low |
| Low birth weight | 11 | 10,150a | 1779 | Low |
| Malnutrition | 4 | 1464 | 342 | Very low |
| Maternal diseases | 14 | 15,312a | 1853 | Low |
| Maternal fever | 4 | 4921 | 536 | Low |
| Maternal smoking | 6 | 4227 | 1278 | Low |
| Maternal Urinary disease | 4 | 5410 | 592 | Low |
| Measles | 3 | 4139 | 348 | Low |
| Medication during pregnancy | 8 | 3879 | 722 | Moderate |
| Otitis | 17 | 9421a | 1417 | Low |
| Pneumonia | 12 | 10,021a | 1581 | Low |
| Pre-eclampsia | 7 | 7517 | 1042 | Low |
| Prematurity | 19 | 12,307a | 2405 | Low |
| Rhinitis | 5 | 3281 | 600 | Low |
| Rubeola | 2 | 5338 | 516 | Low |
| Sinusitis | 3 | 1401 | 311 | Low |
| Throat infections | 3 | 2403 | 405 | Low |
| Tonsillitis | 4 | 1290 | 261 | Very low |
| Urinary tract infection | 11 | 8675a | 1015 | Low |
| Vitamin D deficiency | 1 | 1840 | ND | High |
aStudies with large number of examined children where (regardless the low quality of evidence resulting from the retrospective methodology) the meta-analysis revealed odds ratios indicating increased risk of having MIH (Garot et al. 2021).
Factors to be considered for appropriate treatment planning for posterior teeth
| At patient level | At oral level | At tooth level |
|---|---|---|
| Age of patient | Number of affected teeth | Size of defect |
| Medical history | DMFT | Location of defect |
| Ability to cooperate | Developmental stage | Number of surfaces involved |
| Presence/absence of symptoms | Occlusion | Presence/absence of post-eruptive breakdown |
| Access to general dental care | Presence/absence of crowding | Presence/absence of atypical or typical carious lesions and extent |
| Access to specialist care (paediatric dental/orthodontic) | Presence of third permanent molars | Pulpal involvement |
| Hypodontia | History of dental abscess/facial cellulitis | |
| Need for future orthodontic treatment |
Factors to be considered for appropriate treatment planning of anterior teeth
| At patient level | At oral level | At tooth level |
|---|---|---|
| Age of patient | Number of opacities | Colour of opacity |
| Medical history | DMFT | Size of opacity |
| Ability to cooperate | Developmental stage | Depth of opacity |
| Psychological impact of dental appearance on patient (e.g. bullying at school) | Presence/absence of sensitivity | |
| Access to specialist dental care | Presence/absence of post-eruptive breakdown |
GRADE rating for quality of evidence and strength of recommendation regarding treatment options for MIH molars
| Interventions for molars | No. of studies | No. of restorations /teetha | GRADE of evidence quality | Strength of Recommendation |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Fissure sealants, applied with an adhesive, can be used in mild cases in fully erupted molars | 3 | 184 | Moderate | Strong |
| GIC restorations using a non-invasiveb approach may be used as in cases where the child cannot co-operate for conventional treatment | 5 | 333 | Moderate | Conditional |
| Composite resin restorations placed under rubber dam isolation, using an invasive b approach can be used as a restorative option in mild/severe cases | 8 | 793 | Moderate | Strong |
| Non-invasive b composite restorations should not be placed | 2 | 189 | Moderate | Strong |
| The use of self-etch, total etch or deproteinisation with sodium hypochlorite is unlikely to make a difference to the retention rate of a composite restoration | 3 | 137 | Moderate | Strong |
| PMCs can be placed in severe cases | 3 | 88 | Moderate | Strong |
| Laboratory manufactured restorations using an invasive approach can be used as a restorative option in severe cases | 4 | 132 | Moderate | Conditional |
| Good space closure can be achieved spontaneously following extraction of affected molars | 3 | 189 | Moderate | Conditional |
aDrop-outs have not been excluded as it was not possible to ascertain the number in all of the studies due to mixed data
bNon-invasive—preservation of affected enamel; invasive—removal of all hypomineralised enamel to achieve margin on clinically sound enamel
GRADE rating for quality of evidence and strength of recommendation regarding treatment options for MIH incisors
| Interventions for Incisors | No. of studies | No. of teeth | GRADE of evidence quality | Strength of Recommendation |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Resin infiltration can be used to improve the appearance of affected incisor teeth | 3 | 66 | Low | Conditional |
| Microabrasion can be used to improve the appearance of affected incisor teeth | 1 | 43 | Very low | Conditional |
GRADE rating for quality of evidence and strength of recommendation regarding remineralisation and sensitivity reduction options for MIH-affected teeth
| Interventions for remineralisation | No. of studies | No. of teeth | GRADE of evidence quality | Strength of Recommendation |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Topical CPP-ACP can be used to remineralise affected teeth | 3 | 61 | Moderate | Conditional |
| Topical CPP-ACFP/NaF 4–5% with and without tricalcium phosphate can be used to remineralise affected teeth | 3 | 88 | Very low | Conditional |
Fig. 4Diagrammatic management summary according to factor-severity for MIH-affected molars. Severity is incrementally increased from the left to the right. To select the appropriate option, the block with the most severe sign/symptom should dominate the choice
Fig. 5Diagrammatic management summary according to factor-severity for MIH-affected incisors. To select the appropriate option, the block with the most severe sign/symptom should dominate the choice