Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Does the addition of chlorhexidine to glass ionomer cements influence its antimicrobial effect and survival rate? A systematic review.
da Mota Martins, V; Paranhos, L R; de Oliveira, M N; Maia, L C; Machado, A C; Santos-Filho, P C F.
Affiliation
  • da Mota Martins V; Postgraduate Program in Dentistry, School of Dentistry, Federal University of Uberlândia, Uberlândia, Minas Gerais, Brazil.
  • Paranhos LR; Division of Preventive and Community Dentistry, School of Dentistry, Federal University of Uberlândia, Uberlândia, Minas Gerais, Brazil. paranhos.lrp@gmail.com.
  • de Oliveira MN; Postgraduate Program in Dentistry, School of Dentistry, Federal University of Uberlândia, Uberlândia, Minas Gerais, Brazil.
  • Maia LC; Department of Pediatric Dentistry and Orthodontics, School of Dentistry, Universidade Federal do Rio de Janeiro, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil.
  • Machado AC; Health Technical School, Federal University of Uberlândia, Uberlândia, Minas Gerais, Brazil.
  • Santos-Filho PCF; Division of Operative Dentistry and Dental Materials, School of Dentistry, Federal University of Uberlândia, Uberlândia, Minas Gerais, Brazil.
Eur Arch Paediatr Dent ; 23(3): 365-379, 2022 Jun.
Article in En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35286624
PURPOSE: To evaluate the influence of the addition of chlorhexidine on the antimicrobial effect and on the survival of restorations performed with glass ionomer cement. METHODS: Nine databases were used to search for randomized clinical trials that compared the survival rate and the antimicrobial effect of glass ionomer cement (GIC) restorations with and without the incorporation of chlorhexidine (CHX), without restrictions on year or language. Cochrane Collaboration's Risk of Bias 2 was used to assess the risk of bias. The GRADE approach was used to assess the certainty of evidence. RESULTS: From 593 studies found, seven met the inclusion criteria. The concentration of CHX varied between 0.5 and 2%. In general, the addition of CHX to GIC promoted reductions in Streptococcus mutans and Lactobacillus acidophilus burdens when compared to those without CHX. No study showed a difference in the survival of restorations between GIC with CHX and conventional GIC. Individual risk of bias varied from low to high and the certainty of evidence was classified as very low. CONCLUSIONS: Based on a very low level of certainty, the evidence suggests that the incorporation of CHX in GIC might improve the antimicrobial effects for a short time, in addition to having little influence on the survival of the restoration.
Subject(s)
Key words

Full text: 1 Collection: 01-internacional Database: MEDLINE Main subject: Chlorhexidine / Anti-Infective Agents Type of study: Clinical_trials / Systematic_reviews Limits: Humans Language: En Journal: Eur Arch Paediatr Dent Journal subject: ODONTOLOGIA / PEDIATRIA Year: 2022 Document type: Article Affiliation country: Brazil Country of publication: United kingdom

Full text: 1 Collection: 01-internacional Database: MEDLINE Main subject: Chlorhexidine / Anti-Infective Agents Type of study: Clinical_trials / Systematic_reviews Limits: Humans Language: En Journal: Eur Arch Paediatr Dent Journal subject: ODONTOLOGIA / PEDIATRIA Year: 2022 Document type: Article Affiliation country: Brazil Country of publication: United kingdom