Yulin Wen, Xiaowei Zhao, Samantha Kar Yan Li, Edward Chin Man Lo, Chloe Meng Jiang
{"title":"与牙根龋修复治疗成功相关的因素:一项系统综述和荟萃分析。","authors":"Yulin Wen, Xiaowei Zhao, Samantha Kar Yan Li, Edward Chin Man Lo, Chloe Meng Jiang","doi":"10.1016/j.jdent.2024.105539","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Objectives</h3><div>The aims of this systematic review were to estimate the success rates of root caries restorations, and to identify possible factors associated with the success of root caries restorations.</div></div><div><h3>Data and Sources</h3><div>Literature search was conducted in three databases, PubMed, MEDLINE and Web of Science to identify clinical studies reporting on the success of restorative treatment for root caries. Factors that may influence clinical outcomes of the restorative treatment were summarized and analyzed.</div></div><div><h3>Study selection</h3><div>A total of 4116 records were identified, and 9 articles were eligible to be included. A total of 415 participants with 1174 root caries restorations were analyzed. The short-term (6-month) estimated success rates (ESRs) (95 % CI) of root restorations with per protocol (PP) and intention-to-treat (ITT) approach were 95.1 % (92.9 % to 97.3 %) and 90.5 % (86.8 % to 94.1 %), respectively. The long-term (24-month) ESRs were 82.2 % (73.9 % to 90.6 %) and 73.8 % (64.0 % to 83.5 %) by using the PP and ITT approaches, respectively. Resin composite restorations had a higher ESR compared to glass ionomer cement restorations at 12-month follow-up (96.3 % vs. 86.9 %, <em>p</em> = 0.037), but no significant differences were found at 6-month and 24-month follow-ups (<em>p</em> > 0.05). Besides filling material, no other factors with statistically significant association with treatment success could be identified, including study setting, material mixing method, moisture control method, use of liner or not, and restorative technique.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><div>The overall success rate of root caries restorations is good in the short-term (6-month) but decreases over time, with an approximately 20 % failure rate after two years. Complete/partial loss of restoration and gross marginal defect were the main reported reasons accounted for failure. No studied factor has clear evidence to support its association with long-term (24 months or longer) success of root caries restoration.</div></div><div><h3>Clinical Significance</h3><div>This review provides up-to-date evidence on the overall success rates of root caries restorations. No compelling evidence shows any studied factor is related to the long-term success of root caries restoration, whilst there is a tendency to observe higher success rates of resin composite compared to glass ionomer cement restorations.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":15585,"journal":{"name":"Journal of dentistry","volume":"153 ","pages":"Article 105539"},"PeriodicalIF":4.8000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Factors associated with the success of restorative treatment for root caries: A systematic review with meta-analysis\",\"authors\":\"Yulin Wen, Xiaowei Zhao, Samantha Kar Yan Li, Edward Chin Man Lo, Chloe Meng Jiang\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.jdent.2024.105539\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><h3>Objectives</h3><div>The aims of this systematic review were to estimate the success rates of root caries restorations, and to identify possible factors associated with the success of root caries restorations.</div></div><div><h3>Data and Sources</h3><div>Literature search was conducted in three databases, PubMed, MEDLINE and Web of Science to identify clinical studies reporting on the success of restorative treatment for root caries. Factors that may influence clinical outcomes of the restorative treatment were summarized and analyzed.</div></div><div><h3>Study selection</h3><div>A total of 4116 records were identified, and 9 articles were eligible to be included. A total of 415 participants with 1174 root caries restorations were analyzed. The short-term (6-month) estimated success rates (ESRs) (95 % CI) of root restorations with per protocol (PP) and intention-to-treat (ITT) approach were 95.1 % (92.9 % to 97.3 %) and 90.5 % (86.8 % to 94.1 %), respectively. The long-term (24-month) ESRs were 82.2 % (73.9 % to 90.6 %) and 73.8 % (64.0 % to 83.5 %) by using the PP and ITT approaches, respectively. Resin composite restorations had a higher ESR compared to glass ionomer cement restorations at 12-month follow-up (96.3 % vs. 86.9 %, <em>p</em> = 0.037), but no significant differences were found at 6-month and 24-month follow-ups (<em>p</em> > 0.05). Besides filling material, no other factors with statistically significant association with treatment success could be identified, including study setting, material mixing method, moisture control method, use of liner or not, and restorative technique.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><div>The overall success rate of root caries restorations is good in the short-term (6-month) but decreases over time, with an approximately 20 % failure rate after two years. Complete/partial loss of restoration and gross marginal defect were the main reported reasons accounted for failure. No studied factor has clear evidence to support its association with long-term (24 months or longer) success of root caries restoration.</div></div><div><h3>Clinical Significance</h3><div>This review provides up-to-date evidence on the overall success rates of root caries restorations. No compelling evidence shows any studied factor is related to the long-term success of root caries restoration, whilst there is a tendency to observe higher success rates of resin composite compared to glass ionomer cement restorations.</div></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":15585,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of dentistry\",\"volume\":\"153 \",\"pages\":\"Article 105539\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-02-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of dentistry\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0300571224007085\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of dentistry","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0300571224007085","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
目的:本系统综述的目的是评估龋根修复的成功率,并确定与龋根修复成功相关的可能因素。资料和来源:检索PubMed、MEDLINE和Web of Science三个数据库的文献,以确定有关根性龋修复治疗成功的临床研究报告。对影响恢复性治疗临床效果的因素进行总结和分析。研究选择:共纳入4116条记录,其中9篇符合纳入条件。共有415名参与者进行了1174例牙根龋修复。按方案(PP)和意向治疗(ITT)方法进行根修复的短期(6个月)估计成功率(esr) (95%CI)分别为95.1%(92.9%至97.3%)和90.5%(86.8%至94.1%)。采用PP和ITT方法的长期(24个月)esr分别为82.2%(73.9% ~ 90.6%)和73.8%(64.0% ~ 83.5%)。在12个月的随访中,树脂复合材料修复体的ESR高于玻璃离子水门铁修复体(96.3%比86.9%,p=0.037),但在6个月和24个月的随访中没有发现显著差异(p = 0.05)。除填充材料外,研究环境、材料混合方法、水分控制方法、衬垫使用与否、修复技术等因素均未发现与治疗成功有统计学意义相关的因素。结论:牙根龋短期内(6个月)整体修复成功率较好,但随着时间的推移成功率逐渐降低,2年后失败率约为20%。完全/部分修复损失和总边缘缺陷是报告失败的主要原因。没有研究的因素有明确的证据支持其与长期(24个月或更长时间)根龋修复成功的关系。临床意义:本综述提供了牙根龋修复总体成功率的最新证据。没有令人信服的证据表明任何研究因素与根龋修复的长期成功有关,而树脂复合材料与玻璃离子水门铁修复相比,有更高的成功率的趋势。
Factors associated with the success of restorative treatment for root caries: A systematic review with meta-analysis
Objectives
The aims of this systematic review were to estimate the success rates of root caries restorations, and to identify possible factors associated with the success of root caries restorations.
Data and Sources
Literature search was conducted in three databases, PubMed, MEDLINE and Web of Science to identify clinical studies reporting on the success of restorative treatment for root caries. Factors that may influence clinical outcomes of the restorative treatment were summarized and analyzed.
Study selection
A total of 4116 records were identified, and 9 articles were eligible to be included. A total of 415 participants with 1174 root caries restorations were analyzed. The short-term (6-month) estimated success rates (ESRs) (95 % CI) of root restorations with per protocol (PP) and intention-to-treat (ITT) approach were 95.1 % (92.9 % to 97.3 %) and 90.5 % (86.8 % to 94.1 %), respectively. The long-term (24-month) ESRs were 82.2 % (73.9 % to 90.6 %) and 73.8 % (64.0 % to 83.5 %) by using the PP and ITT approaches, respectively. Resin composite restorations had a higher ESR compared to glass ionomer cement restorations at 12-month follow-up (96.3 % vs. 86.9 %, p = 0.037), but no significant differences were found at 6-month and 24-month follow-ups (p > 0.05). Besides filling material, no other factors with statistically significant association with treatment success could be identified, including study setting, material mixing method, moisture control method, use of liner or not, and restorative technique.
Conclusion
The overall success rate of root caries restorations is good in the short-term (6-month) but decreases over time, with an approximately 20 % failure rate after two years. Complete/partial loss of restoration and gross marginal defect were the main reported reasons accounted for failure. No studied factor has clear evidence to support its association with long-term (24 months or longer) success of root caries restoration.
Clinical Significance
This review provides up-to-date evidence on the overall success rates of root caries restorations. No compelling evidence shows any studied factor is related to the long-term success of root caries restoration, whilst there is a tendency to observe higher success rates of resin composite compared to glass ionomer cement restorations.
期刊介绍:
The Journal of Dentistry has an open access mirror journal The Journal of Dentistry: X, sharing the same aims and scope, editorial team, submission system and rigorous peer review.
The Journal of Dentistry is the leading international dental journal within the field of Restorative Dentistry. Placing an emphasis on publishing novel and high-quality research papers, the Journal aims to influence the practice of dentistry at clinician, research, industry and policy-maker level on an international basis.
Topics covered include the management of dental disease, periodontology, endodontology, operative dentistry, fixed and removable prosthodontics, dental biomaterials science, long-term clinical trials including epidemiology and oral health, technology transfer of new scientific instrumentation or procedures, as well as clinically relevant oral biology and translational research.
The Journal of Dentistry will publish original scientific research papers including short communications. It is also interested in publishing review articles and leaders in themed areas which will be linked to new scientific research. Conference proceedings are also welcome and expressions of interest should be communicated to the Editor.