Effectiveness of silver diamine fluoride application with atraumatic restorative treatment in arresting the progression of dental caries in children and adults: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

IF 1.5 Q3 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES
Anju Varughese, Chandrashekhar Janakiram, Vineetha Karuveettil, Anju James
{"title":"Effectiveness of silver diamine fluoride application with atraumatic restorative treatment in arresting the progression of dental caries in children and adults: a systematic review and meta-analysis.","authors":"Anju Varughese, Chandrashekhar Janakiram, Vineetha Karuveettil, Anju James","doi":"10.11124/JBIES-24-00299","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>This systematic review aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of the application of silver diamine fluoride (SDF) with atraumatic restorative treatment (ART) in arresting the progression of dental caries in cavitated primary or permanent teeth compared with any other caries-arresting treatment.</p><p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Dental caries is the most prevalent oral disease globally. Patient-friendly, minimally invasive therapeutic interventions are needed to prevent caries progression and restore cavitated caries lesions cost-effectively. This review assessed the effectiveness of the silver diamine fluoride with atraumatic restorative treatment (SDF-ART technique) in cavitated primary and permanent dentition.</p><p><strong>Inclusion criteria: </strong>Participants of any age with cavitated dental caries lesions in either coronal or root caries of primary or permanent teeth according to International Caries Detection and Assessment System criteria were included. Tooth restoration with direct pulp capping was excluded. Eligible randomized controlled trials included primary or permanent teeth treated with the SDF-ART technique compared with a control, such as SDF application only, ART only, restoration using composite or topical application of other fluoride, placebo, or no interventions. The primary outcome assessed was caries arrest.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The review details were registered in PROSPERO, following which a primary search was conducted in MEDLINE (Ovid), Scopus, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Dentistry and Oral Sciences Source, CINAHL (EBSCOhost), Web of Science Core Collection, ProQuest Dissertations and Theses, and Google Scholar. The search date was from January 2016 until March 31, 2024. Data was extracted from included studies regarding the main outcome variable: caries arrest. Critical appraisal was done by 2 independent reviewers to evaluate methodological quality using the JBI Critical Appraisal Checklist for Randomized Controlled Trials. The random-effects model was employed in meta-analysis. The certainty of the evidence was assessed using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach, and a Summary of Findings was created.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>After removal of duplicates, 638 records were retrieved from the databases. After screening against the inclusion criteria, 7 studies were selected for narrative synthesis after meeting the eligibility criteria requirements. A total of 611 children between 3 and 13 years were included for descriptive analysis. A meta-analysis of 4 studies, with a total sampling unit of 1085 teeth, showed no significant difference in clinical effectiveness of SDF-ART compared with ART alone for caries arrest at 12-month recall (odds ratio 0.84; 95% CI 0.64, 1.11; P=0.215), and the evidence was graded very low. Similarly, pooled results from 2 studies with a sample size of 879 teeth at 24-month recall demonstrated no significant difference in the clinical effectiveness of SDF-ART compared with ART alone for caries arrest (odds ratio 0.89; 95% CI 0.60, 1.32; P=0.556), and the evidence was graded low. The pooled results were depicted as forest plots for the primary outcome.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Studies comparing the effectiveness of SDF-ART vs ART are insufficient to determine the effectiveness of the SDF-ART technique in caries arrest. The scientific evidence on the effectiveness of SDF-ART in children and adults is inconclusive.</p><p><strong>Review registration: </strong>PROSPERO CRD42023426766.</p>","PeriodicalId":36399,"journal":{"name":"JBI evidence synthesis","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.5000,"publicationDate":"2025-06-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"JBI evidence synthesis","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.11124/JBIES-24-00299","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective: This systematic review aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of the application of silver diamine fluoride (SDF) with atraumatic restorative treatment (ART) in arresting the progression of dental caries in cavitated primary or permanent teeth compared with any other caries-arresting treatment.

Introduction: Dental caries is the most prevalent oral disease globally. Patient-friendly, minimally invasive therapeutic interventions are needed to prevent caries progression and restore cavitated caries lesions cost-effectively. This review assessed the effectiveness of the silver diamine fluoride with atraumatic restorative treatment (SDF-ART technique) in cavitated primary and permanent dentition.

Inclusion criteria: Participants of any age with cavitated dental caries lesions in either coronal or root caries of primary or permanent teeth according to International Caries Detection and Assessment System criteria were included. Tooth restoration with direct pulp capping was excluded. Eligible randomized controlled trials included primary or permanent teeth treated with the SDF-ART technique compared with a control, such as SDF application only, ART only, restoration using composite or topical application of other fluoride, placebo, or no interventions. The primary outcome assessed was caries arrest.

Methods: The review details were registered in PROSPERO, following which a primary search was conducted in MEDLINE (Ovid), Scopus, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Dentistry and Oral Sciences Source, CINAHL (EBSCOhost), Web of Science Core Collection, ProQuest Dissertations and Theses, and Google Scholar. The search date was from January 2016 until March 31, 2024. Data was extracted from included studies regarding the main outcome variable: caries arrest. Critical appraisal was done by 2 independent reviewers to evaluate methodological quality using the JBI Critical Appraisal Checklist for Randomized Controlled Trials. The random-effects model was employed in meta-analysis. The certainty of the evidence was assessed using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach, and a Summary of Findings was created.

Results: After removal of duplicates, 638 records were retrieved from the databases. After screening against the inclusion criteria, 7 studies were selected for narrative synthesis after meeting the eligibility criteria requirements. A total of 611 children between 3 and 13 years were included for descriptive analysis. A meta-analysis of 4 studies, with a total sampling unit of 1085 teeth, showed no significant difference in clinical effectiveness of SDF-ART compared with ART alone for caries arrest at 12-month recall (odds ratio 0.84; 95% CI 0.64, 1.11; P=0.215), and the evidence was graded very low. Similarly, pooled results from 2 studies with a sample size of 879 teeth at 24-month recall demonstrated no significant difference in the clinical effectiveness of SDF-ART compared with ART alone for caries arrest (odds ratio 0.89; 95% CI 0.60, 1.32; P=0.556), and the evidence was graded low. The pooled results were depicted as forest plots for the primary outcome.

Conclusion: Studies comparing the effectiveness of SDF-ART vs ART are insufficient to determine the effectiveness of the SDF-ART technique in caries arrest. The scientific evidence on the effectiveness of SDF-ART in children and adults is inconclusive.

Review registration: PROSPERO CRD42023426766.

应用氟化二胺银与非创伤性修复治疗在阻止儿童和成人龋齿进展中的有效性:一项系统综述和荟萃分析
目的:本系统综述旨在评价氟化二胺银(SDF)与非创伤性修复治疗(ART)在阻止龋齿空化乳牙或恒牙龋齿进展中的效果,并与其他治疗方法进行比较。简介:龋齿是全球最常见的口腔疾病。需要对患者友好的微创治疗干预措施,以经济有效地预防龋齿进展和修复空化的龋齿病变。本综述评估了氟化二胺银与非创伤性修复治疗(SDF-ART技术)在蛀牙和恒牙中的有效性。纳入标准:根据国际龋齿检测和评估系统标准,纳入任何年龄的乳牙或恒牙冠状牙或根状牙空化龋病变的参与者。排除直接髓盖修复牙体。符合条件的随机对照试验包括使用SDF-ART技术治疗的乳牙或恒牙与对照组的比较,如仅使用SDF、仅使用ART、使用复合或局部使用其他氟化物、安慰剂或无干预的修复。评估的主要结果是龋齿抑制。方法:在PROSPERO中登记综述的详细信息,然后在MEDLINE (Ovid)、Scopus、Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials、Dentistry and Oral Sciences Source、CINAHL (EBSCOhost)、Web of Science Core Collection、ProQuest博士论文和论文以及谷歌Scholar中进行初步检索。搜索日期为2016年1月至2024年3月31日。数据从纳入的研究中提取,涉及主要结果变量:龋齿抑制。采用JBI随机对照试验关键评价清单,由2名独立审稿人进行关键评价,评价方法学质量。meta分析采用随机效应模型。使用推荐、评估、发展和评价分级(GRADE)方法评估证据的确定性,并创建结论摘要。结果:删除重复后,从数据库中检索到638条记录。在对照纳入标准进行筛选后,选择符合入选标准要求的7项研究进行叙事综合。共有611名3至13岁的儿童被纳入描述性分析。一项对4项研究的荟萃分析显示,总采样单位为1085颗牙齿,在12个月的回忆中,SDF-ART与单独ART治疗龋病的临床疗效无显著差异(优势比0.84;95% ci 0.64, 1.11;P=0.215),证据等级非常低。同样,在24个月的回顾中,来自2个样本量为879颗牙齿的研究的汇总结果表明,与单独使用ART相比,SDF-ART治疗龋齿的临床疗效无显著差异(优势比0.89;95% ci 0.60, 1.32;P=0.556),证据等级为低。汇总结果用森林样地表示主要结果。结论:比较SDF-ART与ART的有效性的研究不足以确定SDF-ART技术在阻龋方面的有效性。关于SDF-ART在儿童和成人中的有效性的科学证据尚无定论。审查注册:PROSPERO CRD42023426766。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
JBI evidence synthesis
JBI evidence synthesis Nursing-Nursing (all)
CiteScore
4.50
自引率
3.70%
发文量
218
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信