Resina compuesta en comparación a vidrio ionómero modificado con resina en dientes primarios con caries proximales cavitadas / Composite resin compared to resin modified glass ionomer cement in primary teeth with cavitated proximal caries

RESUMEN: Introducción: Las restauraciones de caries proximales en dientes primarios son complejas de realizar, siendo fundamental la correcta realización de la técnica para la restitución de la dentición funcional. La resina compuesta y vidrio ionómero modificado con resina son de los materiales más utilizados en la actualidad, debido a sus propiedades estéticas y de adhesión, pero aún no está clara la efectividad de un material por sobre otro. Métodos: Para responder la pregunta se realizó 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 nueve revisiones sistemáticas que en conjunto incluyeron siete estudios primarios, de los cuales, cinco corresponden a ensayos aleatorizados. Concluimos que el uso de resina compuesta en caries proximales cavitadas de dientes primarios podría resultar en poca o nula diferencia en el fracaso de la restauración, pero la certeza de la evidencia es baja. Además el uso de resina compuestas probablemente aumente el riesgo de caries secundaria. Además, no se encontraron estudios que evaluaran la retención de la restauración.

ABSTRACT: Introduction: Ensure an adequate interproximal caries restorations in primary teeth are essential for the restoration of functional dentition, but the technique is sensitive. Composite resin and resin-modified glass ionomer are among the most widely used materials today, due to their aesthetic and adhesion properties, but the effectiveness of one material over another is not yet clear. 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 nine systematic reviews including seven studies overall, of which five were randomized trials. The use of composite resin may improve the failure of the restorations but the evidence is low. The use of composite resin probably improves the risk of secondary caries. No studies were found evaluating retention of the restoration.

Comparison of Diagnostic Validity between Laser Fluorescence Devices in Proximal Caries / 대한소아치과학회지

The aim of this study was to evaluate the proximal caries detecting ability and identify the optimal cut-off values of two types of laser fluorescence (LF) devices; classic type (DD) and pen type (DDpen).The number of proximal surfaces participated in this study were 164 surfaces in primary dentition and 438 surfaces in permanent dentition. Each tooth surface was sequentially assessed by two types of LF devices, and bitewing radiograph. The radiographs were classified into 3 groups in primary dentition (PR₀, PR₁, PR₂), and 4 groups in permanent dentition (PR₀, PR₁, PR₂, PR₃) according to the depth of caries, and used as gold standard.In primary dentition, the area under the curve (AUC) values of DD were 0.851 and 0.890, and those of DDpen were 0.883 and 0.917, respectively in enamel caries and dentin caries. In permanent dentition, the AUC values of DD were 0.762 and 0.886, and those of DDpen were 0.828 and 0.958, respectively in enamel caries and dentin caries.When detecting proximal caries in posterior teeth with LF devices, DDpen is more useful than DD in both primary and permanent dentition. However, in primary dentition, DD can also be useful to detect proximal caries.

Detection of proximal caries using quantitative light-induced fluorescence-digital and laser fluorescence: a comparative study

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the in vitro validity of quantitative light-induced fluorescence-digital (QLF-D) and laser fluorescence (DIAGNOdent) for assessing proximal caries in extracted premolars, using digital radiography as reference method. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of 102 extracted premolars with similar lengths and shapes were used. A single operator conducted all the examinations using three different detection methods (bitewing radiography, QLF-D, and DIAGNOdent). The bitewing x-ray scale, QLF-D fluorescence loss (ΔF), and DIAGNOdent peak readings were compared and statistically analyzed. RESULTS: Each method showed an excellent reliability. The correlation coefficient between bitewing radiography and QLF-D, DIAGNOdent were −0.644 and 0.448, respectively, while the value between QLF-D and DIAGNOdent was −0.382. The kappa statistics for bitewing radiography and QLF-D had a higher diagnosis consensus than those for bitewing radiography and DIAGNOdent. The QLF-D was moderately to highly accurate (AUC = 0.753 – 0.908), while DIAGNOdent was moderately to less accurate (AUC = 0.622 – 0.784). All detection methods showed statistically significant correlation and high correlation between the bitewing radiography and QLF-D. CONCLUSION: QLF-D was found to be a valid and reliable alternative diagnostic method to digital bitewing radiography for in vitro detection of proximal caries.

Proximal Stripping and the Apprehension to Implement it in Contemporary Orthodontics: A Review.

Interproximal reduction, referring to the reduction of tooth structure in the proximal surfaces of anteriors or posteriors as required by the clinical scenario, has most often intrigued the orthodontist and the general dentist in particular in implementing it in contemporary orthodontics on a regular basis. The reduction of tooth structure as likelihood for the development of dental caries proximally, when the patient is undergoing orthodontic therapy, can in itself be a subject of debate between the conservative general dentists and the orthodontist. With recent treatment options for minimal space requirements in aligning teeth and others such as clear aligner therapy which involve the use of proximal stripping, this review aims to present the current concepts in interproximal reduction and its questionable role as an etiological factor in the development of caries.

Comparison between QraypenTM Imaging and the Conventional Methods of Visual Inspection and Periapical Radiography for Proximal Caries Detection in Primary Molars: An In Vivo Study / 치위생과학회지

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the efficacy of the newly-developed Qraypen™ (All In One Bio, Korea) system for the diagnosis of early proximal caries by comparing it with the conventional methods of visual inspection and periapical radiography. This study was carried out from July 2015 to April 2016 targeting 32 children aged 7~12 years who visited Y-Dental Clinic for school oral health examinations. Two investigators selected and examined a total of 153 primary molars that had not undergone restorative treatment. Comparisons were carried out between visual inspections, readings of posterior periapical radiography images, and readings of Qraypen™ images. This study revealed that the percentage of interproximal surfaces of primary molar teeth without caries incidence was 83.7% using Qraypen™ imaging and 84.9% using visual inspection and periapical radiography. The differences between the two methods were not statistically significant. Thus, Qraypen™ is expected to be a useful and convenient auxiliary diagnostic device that can facilitate the detection of hidden proximal caries in primary molars.

Detection method of proximal caries using line profile in digital intra-oral radiography / 대한구강악안면방사선학회지

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to investigate how to detect proximal caries using line profile and validate linear measurements of proximal caries lesions by basic digital manipulation of radiographic images. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The X-ray images of control group (15) and caries teeth (15) from patients were used. For each image, the line profile at the proximal caries-susceptible zone was calculated. To evaluate the contrast as a function of line profile to detect proximal caries, a difference coefficient (D) that indicates the relative difference between caries and sound dentin or intact enamel was measured. RESULTS: Mean values of D were 0.0354+/-0.0155 in non-caries and 0.2632+/-0.0982 in caries (p<0.001). CONCLUSION: The mean values of caries group were higher than non-caries group and there was correlation between proximal dental caries and D. It is demonstrated that the mean value of D from caries group was higher than that of control group. From the result, values of D possess great potentiality as a new detection parameter for proximal dental caries.