Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Meta-Analysis
. 2018 Nov;22(8):2675-2684.
doi: 10.1007/s00784-018-2605-9. Epub 2018 Sep 20.

Micro-invasive interventions for managing non-cavitated proximal caries of different depths: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Affiliations
Meta-Analysis

Micro-invasive interventions for managing non-cavitated proximal caries of different depths: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Yuee Liang et al. Clin Oral Investig. 2018 Nov.

Abstract

Objectives: The aim of this study was to further evaluate the caries-arresting effectiveness of micro-invasive interventions for non-cavitated proximal caries and analyze their efficacy for caries lesions of different depths.

Materials and methods: Randomized clinical trials (RCTs) of micro-invasive interventions for non-cavitated proximal caries were included in this study. We searched the Cochrane Library, PubMed, Embase, and Web of Science on May 25, 2017, without restrictions. After duplicate study selection, data extraction, and risk of bias assessment, a meta-analysis of the odds ratios (OR) with 95% confidence intervals (95% CIs) and a publication bias analysis were conducted using Stata 12.0.

Results: After 2195 citations were screened, 8 citations of seven studies with follow-up periods from 12 to 36 months were included. The subgroup analysis showed that resin infiltration and resin sealant, but not glass ionomer cement (GIC), could reduce the caries progression rate (resin infiltration: OR = 0.15, 95% CI 0.09 to 0.24; resin sealant: OR = 0.33, 95% CI 0.19 to 0.58; GIC: OR = 0.13, 95% CI 0.01 to 2.65). Further analysis of their efficacies for caries lesions of different depths indicated that resin infiltration could arrest progression of enamel caries and caries around the enamel-dentin junction (EDJ) (enamel: OR = 0.05, 95% CI 0.01 to 0.35; EDJ: OR = 0.07, 95% CI 0.01 to 0.70). However, when the outer third of the dentin was involved, resin infiltration yielded significantly different results compared with the control group (OR = 0.42, 95% CI 0.16 to 1.10). Resin sealant seemed to be ineffective regardless of the caries depth (enamel: OR = 0.62, 95% CI 0.13 to 3.00; EDJ: OR = 0.44, 95% CI 0.09 to 2.15; dentin: OR = 0.43, 95% CI 0.07 to 2.63).

Conclusions: Resin infiltration is effective in arresting the progression of non-cavitated proximal caries involved in EDJ, while the therapeutic effects of resin sealant for different caries depths still needs to be further confirmed.

Clinical relevance: Based on existing evidence, dentists should carefully select appropriate micro-invasive interventions according to the different depths of non-cavitated proximal caries.

Keywords: Meta-analysis; Micro-invasive interventions; Non-cavitated proximal caries; Resin infiltration; Resin sealant; Systematic review.

PubMed Disclaimer

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Int Dent J. 1972 Sep;22(3):401-11 - PubMed
    1. Caries Res. 2013;47(3):183-92 - PubMed
    1. J Clin Diagn Res. 2014 Jul;8(7):ZE04-8 - PubMed
    1. Community Dent Oral Epidemiol. 1998 Apr;26(2):85-6 - PubMed
    1. Caries Res. 2006;40(5):382-8 - PubMed

MeSH terms

Substances

LinkOut - more resources