Clinical and radiographic success of lesion sterilization and tissue repair in primary teeth: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

IF 2.3 Q3 DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE
Khlood Baghlaf, Rana A Alamoudi
{"title":"Clinical and radiographic success of lesion sterilization and tissue repair in primary teeth: a systematic review and meta-analysis.","authors":"Khlood Baghlaf, Rana A Alamoudi","doi":"10.1007/s44445-025-00059-2","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Research evaluating the clinical and radiographic outcomes of lesion sterilization and tissue repair (LSTR), particularly in terms of mobility, pain, sinus tract, fistula, swelling, root resorption, and interradicular radiolucency is yet to be conducted. This systematic review aimed to assess the clinical and radiographic success of LSTR using three antibacterial drug combinations-\"three Mix\" (3MIX)-and compare their success rates with those of conventional pulpectomy and pulpotomy in treating primary teeth. Additionally, the review sought to determine which antibiotic combination is most effective in LSTR in primary teeth.  A comprehensive search strategy was applied across three electronic databases: PubMed, Scopus, and King Abdulaziz Digital Library. Two independent reviewers screened 536 titles and 70 abstracts, ultimately selecting 14 articles based on the predefined inclusion criteria. Clinical and radiographic outcomes were evaluated at 6, 12, and 18-month follow-up intervals. The Cochrane's risk of bias tool was used to assess the quality of randomized trials, and the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale was used to assess the methodological quality of non-randomized trials. A total of 14 clinical studies were included in the review. Only two studies compared LSTR to MTA pulpotomy. The composition of 3MIX and other antibacterial mixtures used in LSTR varied significantly, though consistent clinical and radiographic success was observed across the studies. All studies demonstrated relatively high success rates for 3MIX antibiotic paste, both clinically and radiographically. No significant differences were found between the success rates of 3MIX, Vitapex, zinc oxide eugenol, and other 3MIX combinations in pulpectomy of primary teeth. At the 12-month follow-up, the meta-analysis found no significant difference in clinical and radiographic success rates between 3MIX and conventional pulpotomy and pulpectomy. 3MIX may be effective for primary teeth pulpectomy, especially when conventional pulpectomy treatments are not suitable in young, uncooperative children.</p>","PeriodicalId":47246,"journal":{"name":"Saudi Dental Journal","volume":"37 7-9","pages":"61"},"PeriodicalIF":2.3000,"publicationDate":"2025-10-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12528516/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Saudi Dental Journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s44445-025-00059-2","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Research evaluating the clinical and radiographic outcomes of lesion sterilization and tissue repair (LSTR), particularly in terms of mobility, pain, sinus tract, fistula, swelling, root resorption, and interradicular radiolucency is yet to be conducted. This systematic review aimed to assess the clinical and radiographic success of LSTR using three antibacterial drug combinations-"three Mix" (3MIX)-and compare their success rates with those of conventional pulpectomy and pulpotomy in treating primary teeth. Additionally, the review sought to determine which antibiotic combination is most effective in LSTR in primary teeth.  A comprehensive search strategy was applied across three electronic databases: PubMed, Scopus, and King Abdulaziz Digital Library. Two independent reviewers screened 536 titles and 70 abstracts, ultimately selecting 14 articles based on the predefined inclusion criteria. Clinical and radiographic outcomes were evaluated at 6, 12, and 18-month follow-up intervals. The Cochrane's risk of bias tool was used to assess the quality of randomized trials, and the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale was used to assess the methodological quality of non-randomized trials. A total of 14 clinical studies were included in the review. Only two studies compared LSTR to MTA pulpotomy. The composition of 3MIX and other antibacterial mixtures used in LSTR varied significantly, though consistent clinical and radiographic success was observed across the studies. All studies demonstrated relatively high success rates for 3MIX antibiotic paste, both clinically and radiographically. No significant differences were found between the success rates of 3MIX, Vitapex, zinc oxide eugenol, and other 3MIX combinations in pulpectomy of primary teeth. At the 12-month follow-up, the meta-analysis found no significant difference in clinical and radiographic success rates between 3MIX and conventional pulpotomy and pulpectomy. 3MIX may be effective for primary teeth pulpectomy, especially when conventional pulpectomy treatments are not suitable in young, uncooperative children.

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

乳牙病变灭菌和组织修复的临床和影像学成功:系统回顾和荟萃分析。
评估病变灭菌和组织修复(LSTR)的临床和影像学结果的研究,特别是在活动、疼痛、窦道、瘘管、肿胀、根吸收和根间放射透光度方面的研究尚未进行。本系统综述旨在评估使用三种抗菌药物组合“三混合”(3MIX)治疗乳牙LSTR的临床和影像学成功率,并将其与传统的髓质切除术和髓质切除术的成功率进行比较。此外,该综述试图确定哪种抗生素组合对乳牙的LSTR最有效。综合搜索策略应用于三个电子数据库:PubMed、Scopus和King Abdulaziz数字图书馆。两名独立审稿人筛选了536篇标题和70篇摘要,最终根据预定义的纳入标准选择了14篇文章。在6、12和18个月的随访期间评估临床和影像学结果。采用Cochrane偏倚风险工具评价随机试验的质量,采用纽卡斯尔-渥太华量表评价非随机试验的方法学质量。本综述共纳入了14项临床研究。只有两项研究比较了LSTR和MTA切髓术。3MIX和其他用于LSTR的抗菌混合物的组成差异很大,尽管在所有研究中观察到一致的临床和放射学成功。所有研究均显示3MIX抗生素膏体的临床和影像学成功率相对较高。3MIX、Vitapex、氧化锌丁香酚及其他3MIX组合在乳牙除牙成功率上无显著差异。在12个月的随访中,荟萃分析发现3MIX与常规髓质切开术和髓质切开术的临床和影像学成功率无显著差异。3MIX可能对乳牙除牙有效,特别是当传统的除牙治疗不适合年幼、不合作的儿童时。
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
Saudi Dental Journal
Saudi Dental Journal DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE-
CiteScore
3.60
自引率
0.00%
发文量
86
审稿时长
22 weeks
期刊介绍: Saudi Dental Journal is an English language, peer-reviewed scholarly publication in the area of dentistry. Saudi Dental Journal publishes original research and reviews on, but not limited to: • dental disease • clinical trials • dental equipment • new and experimental techniques • epidemiology and oral health • restorative dentistry • periodontology • endodontology • prosthodontics • paediatric dentistry • orthodontics and dental education Saudi Dental Journal is the official publication of the Saudi Dental Society and is published by King Saud University in collaboration with Elsevier and is edited by an international group of eminent researchers.
×
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