化疗与普通牙膏对固定矫治器正畸患者牙菌斑和牙龈炎症的影响:一项系统回顾和荟萃分析。

Yinli Liu, Cees Valkenburg, Ronald Edwin Gaston Jonkman, Dagmar Else Slot
{"title":"化疗与普通牙膏对固定矫治器正畸患者牙菌斑和牙龈炎症的影响:一项系统回顾和荟萃分析。","authors":"Yinli Liu, Cees Valkenburg, Ronald Edwin Gaston Jonkman, Dagmar Else Slot","doi":"10.2319/071824-573.1","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>To analyze, appraise, and synthesize papers in which authors have compared the effects of chemotherapeutic toothpaste (CTP) and regular toothpaste (RTP) on plaque scores (PSs), gingival scores (GSs), and bleeding scores (BSs) in orthodontic patients wearing fixed appliances (FAs).</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>PubMed-MEDLINE, Cochrane-CENTRAL, and Embase databases were searched with predefined search terms until April 2024 for controlled or randomized controlled clinical trials aligning with the aim. In the eligible papers, risk of bias was evaluated, data of interest were extracted, and a descriptive analysis was performed. If possible, meta-analyses and subanalyses on specific factors were conducted. The quality of evidence and strength of the recommendation were rated.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>In our search and selection, we obtained five papers describing eight comparisons. Potential risk of bias was assessed as some concerns to high, and heterogeneity was considered substantial. Descriptive analysis revealed no significant difference in PS and BS, with an improvement in GS favoring CTP. Meta-analyses of the end scores showed CTP significantly reduced PS (standardized mean difference [SMD] = -0.26; 95% confidence interval [CI] = -0.52, -0.01; P = .04). However, no significant effects were observed on GS and BS. These findings were supported by the subanalyses on CTP with chlorhexidine (CHX; PS: mean difference [MD] = -5.12; 95% CI = -10.08, -0.15; P = .04). The quality of evidence was graded as very low, and strength of the recommendation was judged as very weak.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>For orthodontic patients with FAs, very weak certainty exists in recommending CTP (eg, with CHX) over RTP for use with toothbrushing. CTP may have a very small effect on PS and a small effect on GS.</p>","PeriodicalId":94224,"journal":{"name":"The Angle orthodontist","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-04-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Effects of chemotherapeutic vs regular toothpastes on dental plaque and gingival inflammation in orthodontic patients with fixed appliances: a systematic review and meta-analysis.\",\"authors\":\"Yinli Liu, Cees Valkenburg, Ronald Edwin Gaston Jonkman, Dagmar Else Slot\",\"doi\":\"10.2319/071824-573.1\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>To analyze, appraise, and synthesize papers in which authors have compared the effects of chemotherapeutic toothpaste (CTP) and regular toothpaste (RTP) on plaque scores (PSs), gingival scores (GSs), and bleeding scores (BSs) in orthodontic patients wearing fixed appliances (FAs).</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>PubMed-MEDLINE, Cochrane-CENTRAL, and Embase databases were searched with predefined search terms until April 2024 for controlled or randomized controlled clinical trials aligning with the aim. In the eligible papers, risk of bias was evaluated, data of interest were extracted, and a descriptive analysis was performed. If possible, meta-analyses and subanalyses on specific factors were conducted. The quality of evidence and strength of the recommendation were rated.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>In our search and selection, we obtained five papers describing eight comparisons. Potential risk of bias was assessed as some concerns to high, and heterogeneity was considered substantial. Descriptive analysis revealed no significant difference in PS and BS, with an improvement in GS favoring CTP. Meta-analyses of the end scores showed CTP significantly reduced PS (standardized mean difference [SMD] = -0.26; 95% confidence interval [CI] = -0.52, -0.01; P = .04). However, no significant effects were observed on GS and BS. These findings were supported by the subanalyses on CTP with chlorhexidine (CHX; PS: mean difference [MD] = -5.12; 95% CI = -10.08, -0.15; P = .04). The quality of evidence was graded as very low, and strength of the recommendation was judged as very weak.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>For orthodontic patients with FAs, very weak certainty exists in recommending CTP (eg, with CHX) over RTP for use with toothbrushing. CTP may have a very small effect on PS and a small effect on GS.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":94224,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"The Angle orthodontist\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-04-18\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"The Angle orthodontist\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2319/071824-573.1\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The Angle orthodontist","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2319/071824-573.1","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:对使用固定矫治器(FAs)的正畸患者使用化疗牙膏(CTP)和普通牙膏(RTP)对牙菌斑评分(ps)、牙龈评分(GSs)和出血评分(BSs)的影响进行分析、评价和综合。材料和方法:在PubMed-MEDLINE, Cochrane-CENTRAL和Embase数据库中使用预定义的搜索词检索符合目标的对照或随机对照临床试验,直到2024年4月。在符合条件的论文中,评估偏倚风险,提取感兴趣的数据,并进行描述性分析。如有可能,对具体因素进行meta分析和亚分析。对证据的质量和建议的力度进行了评级。结果:在我们的检索和选择中,我们获得了5篇论文,描述了8个比较。潜在的偏倚风险被评估为一些关注到高,异质性被认为是实质性的。描述性分析显示PS和BS无显著差异,GS的改善有利于CTP。最终评分的荟萃分析显示,CTP显著降低了PS(标准化平均差[SMD] = -0.26;95%置信区间[CI] = -0.52, -0.01;P = .04)。然而,对GS和BS无明显影响。这些发现得到了CTP与氯己定(CHX;PS:平均差[MD] = -5.12;95% ci = -10.08, -0.15;P = .04)。证据质量被评为非常低,推荐的强度被评为非常弱。结论:对于FAs正畸患者,推荐CTP(如CHX)与RTP联合刷牙的确定性非常弱。CTP对PS的影响很小,对GS的影响也很小。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Effects of chemotherapeutic vs regular toothpastes on dental plaque and gingival inflammation in orthodontic patients with fixed appliances: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Objectives: To analyze, appraise, and synthesize papers in which authors have compared the effects of chemotherapeutic toothpaste (CTP) and regular toothpaste (RTP) on plaque scores (PSs), gingival scores (GSs), and bleeding scores (BSs) in orthodontic patients wearing fixed appliances (FAs).

Materials and methods: PubMed-MEDLINE, Cochrane-CENTRAL, and Embase databases were searched with predefined search terms until April 2024 for controlled or randomized controlled clinical trials aligning with the aim. In the eligible papers, risk of bias was evaluated, data of interest were extracted, and a descriptive analysis was performed. If possible, meta-analyses and subanalyses on specific factors were conducted. The quality of evidence and strength of the recommendation were rated.

Results: In our search and selection, we obtained five papers describing eight comparisons. Potential risk of bias was assessed as some concerns to high, and heterogeneity was considered substantial. Descriptive analysis revealed no significant difference in PS and BS, with an improvement in GS favoring CTP. Meta-analyses of the end scores showed CTP significantly reduced PS (standardized mean difference [SMD] = -0.26; 95% confidence interval [CI] = -0.52, -0.01; P = .04). However, no significant effects were observed on GS and BS. These findings were supported by the subanalyses on CTP with chlorhexidine (CHX; PS: mean difference [MD] = -5.12; 95% CI = -10.08, -0.15; P = .04). The quality of evidence was graded as very low, and strength of the recommendation was judged as very weak.

Conclusions: For orthodontic patients with FAs, very weak certainty exists in recommending CTP (eg, with CHX) over RTP for use with toothbrushing. CTP may have a very small effect on PS and a small effect on GS.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信