Scoping review of trials evaluating adhesive strategies in pediatric dentistry: where do simplified strategies lie?
Scoping review of trials evaluating adhesive strategies in pediatric dentistry: where do simplified strategies lie?
复制标题
DOI：
10.1186/s12903-021-01395-5
复制
发表时间：
2021-01-19
期刊：
影响因子：
2.9
通讯作者：
Ashley P
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Delgado AHS;Jamal H;Young A;Ashley P
粘结剂修复可以保守地处理龋齿，并越来越多地被用作儿童牙科的修复选择。对于儿童来说，安置可能很困难，因为需要进行多个结合步骤的合作。因此，评估新的、更简单的策略是否已经在临床试验中使用，以及临床试验是否正在研究不同的现有粘连策略是至关重要的。本次审查遵循系统审查和适应范围审查的荟萃分析(PRISMA-SCR)指南的首选报告项目。应用PubMed/Medline、Cochrane Central、Scope us和EMBASE进行系统检索，检索词为自由关键词和受控检索词。对需要恢复性干预的儿童进行的临床试验包括粘连策略。只有在过去10年中发表的关于用树脂复合体修复乳牙的同行评议试验才符合条件。数据图表由两名评价者独立完成，研究根据他们的日期、类型、干预、样本量、观察期、结果和结论进行总结。采用Cochrane的Risk of Bias 2.0工具进行质量评估。共找到700篇潜在相关的参考文献，经过严格的纳入计划，共产生8项合格的临床试验。在这些试验中，有7项是随机临床试验。大多数试验采用开口设计，观察期从12个月到36个月不等。这些试验评估了来自不同策略的两种自粘性复合材料、两种散装填充复合材料、两种新型复合材料、一种复合体和八种粘合剂的干预措施。纳入的大多数研究(4/8)被认为提出了一些关于偏见风险的担忧，其中两项被归类为高风险，两项被归类为低风险。比较粘接策略的研究很少，特别是在良好的基板上的粘接剂。现有的研究并没有反映当前可用于儿科牙科的所有方法。进一步研究生物活性复合材料和当代粘合剂是必要的。
Adhesive restorations allow a conservative approach to caries management and are increasingly used as a restorative option in pediatric dentistry. Placement can be difficult in children because of the cooperation required for multiple bonding steps. Due to this, it is vital to assess if novel, simpler strategies have been featured in clinical trials and if clinical trials are researching the different existing adhesive strategies. This review followed Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analysis adapted for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA-ScR) guidelines. PubMed/Medline, Cochrane Central, Scopus and EMBASE were used for systematic search, using free keywords and controlled search terms. Clinical trials of children requiring a restorative intervention which featured adhesive strategies were included. Only peer-reviewed trials of primary teeth restored with resin composites, published in the last 10-year period were eligible. Data charting was accomplished independently by two reviewers, and studies were summarized according to their date, type, intervention, sample size, observation period, outcomes and conclusions. Quality assessment was performed using Cochrane’s Risk of Bias 2.0 tool. 700 potentially relevant references were found, which after a rigorous inclusion scheme, resulted in a total of 8 eligible clinical trials. Out of these, 7 were randomized clinical trials. Most trials featured a split-mouth design and the observation period ranged from 12 to 36 months. The trials evaluated interventions of two self-adhesive composites, two bulk-fill composites, two novel composites, one compomer and eight adhesives from different strategies. Most studies (4/8) included were judged to raise some concerns regarding risk of bias, while two were classified as high risk and two as low. Few studies comparing adhesive strategies were found, especially adhesives in sound substrates. The existing studies do not reflect all current approaches that could be used in pediatric dentistry. Further studies addressing bioactive composites and contemporary adhesives are necessary.
登录
查看更多内容
影响因子：
5
作者：
Agee, Kelli A.;Prakki, Anuradha;Abu-Haimed, Tariq;Naguib, Ghada H.;Abu Nawareg, Manar;Tezvergil-Mutluay, Arzu;Scheffel, Debora L. S.;Chen, Chen;Jang, Seung Soon;Hwang, Hyea;Brackett, Martha;Gregoire, Genevieve;Tay, Franklin R.;Breschi, Lorenzo;Pashley, David H.
通讯作者：
Pashley, David H.
影响因子：
1.9
作者：
Atabek, Didem;Aktas, Nagehan;Bani, Mehmet
通讯作者：
Bani, Mehmet
影响因子：
--
作者：
Donmez, Secil Bektas;Turgut, Melek D.;Lussi, Adrian
通讯作者：
Lussi, Adrian
影响因子：
5
作者：
Breschi, Lorenzo;Maravic, Tatjana;Mazzoni, Annalisa
通讯作者：
Mazzoni, Annalisa
影响因子：
3.4
作者：
de Oliveira, Natalia Gomes;Lima, Alessandra Souza Leao Costa;de Vasconcelos Carvalho, Marianne
通讯作者：
de Vasconcelos Carvalho, Marianne