ABSTRACT
RESUMEN: Introducción: Las restauraciones en el sector posterior son generalmente manejadas mediante el uso de resinas convencionales con técnica incremental. Debido a diversas limitaciones de la técnica convencional, la técnica bulk-fill ha ganado relevancia en la práctica clínica. Este resumen tiene como objetivo evaluar la efectividad de ambas técnicas al momento de realizar restauraciones clase I y clase II de Black en dientes posteriores permanentes. Métodos: Realizamos una búsqueda en Epistemonikos, la mayor base de datos de revisiones sistemáticas en salud, la cual es mantenida mediante el cribado de múltiples fuentes de información, incluyendo MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane, entre otras. Extrajimos los datos desde las revisiones identificadas, analizamos los datos de los estudios primarios, realizamos un metanálisis y preparamos una tabla de resumen de los resultados utilizando el método GRADE. Resultados y conclusiones: Identificamos cinco revisiones sistemáticas que en conjunto incluyeron 15 estudios primarios, todos correspondientes a ensayos aleatorizados. Concluimos que la técnica bulk-fill podría aumentar levemente el fracaso de la restauración a mediano plazo, podría resultar en poca o nula diferencia en el fracaso de la restauración a largo plazo y podría resultar en poca o nula diferencia en el desarrollo de caries secundaria, pero la certeza de la evidencia es baja. La técnica bulk-fill probablemente resulta en poca o nula diferencia en el riesgo de sensibilidad postoperatoria.
ABSTRACT: Introduction: Conventional resin composite has been widely used in the restoration of posterior teeth. However, due to its limitations, the bulk-fill technique has been adopted by clinicians. This evidence summary aims to evaluate the effectiveness of both techniques for class I and II restorations in permanent posterior teeth. Methods: We searched in Epistemonikos, the largest database of systematic reviews in health, which is maintained by screening multiple information sources, including MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane, among others. We extracted data from the systematic reviews, reanalyzed data of primary studies, conducted a meta-analysis and generated a summary of findings table using the GRADE approach. Results and conclusions: We identified five systematic reviews including fifteen studies overall, of which all were randomized trials. We conclude that bulk-fill technique may slightly improve the risk of medium-term restoration failure, may make little or no difference to long-term restoration failure and may make little or no difference to secondary caries but the certainty of the evidence has been assessed as low. Finally, bulk-fill technique probably makes little or no difference to postoperative sensibility.
Subject(s)
Humans , Dental Restoration Failure , Dental Restoration, Permanent/methods , Composite Resins , Decision Making , MethodsABSTRACT
OBJECTIVE: To estimate the motor unit numbers in normal adult hand muscles using manual incremental technique and F-wave technique. METHOD: We estimated the motor unit numbers in abductor pollicis brevis muscles of twenty normal adults. In manual incremental technique, we estimated the motor unit numbers using motor unit count program setted in electrodiagnostic equipment (Dantec, Keypoint). In F-wave technique, we estimated the motor unit numbers dividing maximal M-potential amplitude by mean amplitude of surface motor unit action potential. RESULTS: There was no significant difference of motor unit numbers between right and left abductor pollicis brevis in both manual incremental and F-wave technique. Motor unit numbers using F-wave technique were significantly greater than motor unit numbers using manual incremental technique. CONCLUSION: The difference of motor unit numbers using manual incremental technique and F-wave technique was considered as a difference of functional electrical stimulation. F-wave technique was more physiologic and functional method of motor unit numbers estimation than manual incremental technique.