Question · asked by 1 review
Micro-invasive treatment (proximal sealing or resin infiltration): resin sealant, glass ionomer sealant, polyurethane/adhesive patch, or resin infiltration vs Non-invasive / control treatment: Radiographic proximal caries lesion progression
- Population
- Patients with non-cavitated proximal (approximal) caries lesions (primary or permanent dentition)
- Intervention
- Micro-invasive treatment (proximal sealing or resin infiltration): resin sealant, glass ionomer sealant, polyurethane/adhesive patch, or resin infiltration
- Comparison
- Non-invasive / control treatment
- Outcome
- Radiographic proximal caries lesion progression
In the low caries-risk subgroup, micro-invasive treatment reduced the odds of lesion progression (OR 0.24, 95% CI 0.08 to 0.72; ungraded subgroup).
What each review found
Current versions onlyNo studies found 0 · 0%GRADE not reported 8 · 88.9%Very low 0 · 0%Low 0 · 0%Moderate 1 · 11.1%High 0 · 0%
| Finding | Effect | Studies | GRADE certainty |
|---|---|---|---|
Micro-invasive treatment (resin infiltration or sealing) vs Non-invasive / control treatment Radiographic proximal caries lesion progression · Patients with non-cavitated proximal (approximal) caries lesions (primary or permanent dentition) · Longest available follow-up, Caries risk: low In the low caries-risk subgroup, micro-invasive treatment reduced the odds of lesion progression (OR 0.24, 95% CI 0.08 to 0.72; ungraded subgroup). Infiltration and sealing for managing non-cavitated proximal lesions: a systematic review and meta-analysis. (2021) All outcomes | OR 0.24 [0.08, 0.72] | 2 studies | GRADE not reported |
Micro-invasive treatment (resin infiltration or sealing) vs Non-invasive / control treatment Radiographic proximal caries lesion progression · Patients with non-cavitated proximal (approximal) caries lesions (primary or permanent dentition) · Longest available follow-up, Caries risk: moderate to high In the moderate to high caries-risk subgroup, micro-invasive treatment reduced the odds of lesion progression (OR 0.17, 95% CI 0.10 to 0.29; ungraded subgroup). Infiltration and sealing for managing non-cavitated proximal lesions: a systematic review and meta-analysis. (2021) All outcomes | OR 0.17 [0.10, 0.29] | 4 studies | GRADE not reported |
Micro-invasive treatment (resin infiltration or sealing) vs Non-invasive / control treatment Radiographic proximal caries lesion progression · Patients with non-cavitated proximal (approximal) caries lesions (primary or permanent dentition) · Longest available follow-up, Primary dentition In the primary dentition, micro-invasive treatment reduced the odds of proximal lesion progression (OR 0.30, 95% CI 0.20 to 0.45; ungraded subgroup). Infiltration and sealing for managing non-cavitated proximal lesions: a systematic review and meta-analysis. (2021) All outcomes | OR 0.30 [0.20, 0.45] | 5 studies | GRADE not reported |
Micro-invasive treatment (resin infiltration or sealing) vs Non-invasive / control treatment Radiographic proximal caries lesion progression · Patients with non-cavitated proximal (approximal) caries lesions (primary or permanent dentition) · Longest available follow-up Micro-invasive treatment (infiltration or sealing) probably reduces the odds of proximal caries lesion progression compared with non-invasive treatment (OR 0.23, 95% CI 0.18 to 0.30; moderate certainty). Infiltration and sealing for managing non-cavitated proximal lesions: a systematic review and meta-analysis. (2021) All outcomes | OR 0.23 [0.18, 0.30] | 17 studies · 830 participants | Moderate |
Micro-invasive treatment (resin infiltration or sealing) vs Non-invasive / control treatment Radiographic proximal caries lesion progression · Patients with non-cavitated proximal (approximal) caries lesions (primary or permanent dentition) · Longest available follow-up, Caries risk: low to moderate In the low to moderate caries-risk subgroup, micro-invasive treatment reduced the odds of lesion progression (OR 0.38, 95% CI 0.18 to 0.81; ungraded subgroup). Infiltration and sealing for managing non-cavitated proximal lesions: a systematic review and meta-analysis. (2021) All outcomes | OR 0.38 [0.18, 0.81] | 1 study | GRADE not reported |
Micro-invasive treatment (resin infiltration or sealing) vs Non-invasive / control treatment Radiographic proximal caries lesion progression · Patients with non-cavitated proximal (approximal) caries lesions (primary or permanent dentition) · Longest available follow-up, Caries risk: moderate In the moderate caries-risk subgroup, the difference between micro-invasive and non-invasive treatment was not significant (OR 0.32, 95% CI 0.01 to 8.27; ungraded subgroup). Infiltration and sealing for managing non-cavitated proximal lesions: a systematic review and meta-analysis. (2021) All outcomes | OR 0.32 [0.01, 8.27] | 1 study | GRADE not reported |
Micro-invasive treatment (resin infiltration or sealing) vs Non-invasive / control treatment Radiographic proximal caries lesion progression · Patients with non-cavitated proximal (approximal) caries lesions (primary or permanent dentition) · Longest available follow-up, Caries risk: high In the high caries-risk subgroup, micro-invasive treatment reduced the odds of lesion progression (OR 0.14, 95% CI 0.07 to 0.28; ungraded subgroup). Infiltration and sealing for managing non-cavitated proximal lesions: a systematic review and meta-analysis. (2021) All outcomes | OR 0.14 [0.07, 0.28] | 3 studies | GRADE not reported |
Micro-invasive treatment (resin infiltration or sealing) vs Non-invasive / control treatment Radiographic proximal caries lesion progression · Patients with non-cavitated proximal (approximal) caries lesions (primary or permanent dentition) · Longest available follow-up, Permanent dentition In the permanent dentition, micro-invasive treatment reduced the odds of proximal lesion progression (OR 0.20, 95% CI 0.14 to 0.28; ungraded subgroup). Infiltration and sealing for managing non-cavitated proximal lesions: a systematic review and meta-analysis. (2021) All outcomes | OR 0.20 [0.14, 0.28] | 12 studies | GRADE not reported |
Micro-invasive treatment (resin infiltration or sealing) vs Non-invasive / control treatment Radiographic proximal caries lesion progression · Patients with non-cavitated proximal (approximal) caries lesions (primary or permanent dentition) · Longest available follow-up, All caries-risk levels (caries-risk subset) In the 9-RCT caries-risk subset, micro-invasive treatment reduced the odds of lesion progression overall (OR 0.20, 95% CI 0.14 to 0.28; ungraded subgroup). Infiltration and sealing for managing non-cavitated proximal lesions: a systematic review and meta-analysis. (2021) All outcomes | OR 0.20 [0.14, 0.28] | 9 studies | GRADE not reported |
Findings are shown side by side, never pooled across reviews.
The reviews
| Review | Searched up to | Included studies | AMSTAR 2 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Infiltration and sealing for managing non-cavitated proximal lesions: a systematic review and meta-analysis. 2021 All outcomes | 6 April 2020 (from inception) | 22 | Critically Low / Critically Low |
Studies behind the findings
The primary studies the full-text reviews tie to this outcome. Reviews with headline outcomes only do not list them here.
- Infiltrating/Sealing Proximal Caries Lesions · 2012 · included by 1 of these review
How reviews are matched to this question
Reviews word the same question differently. Four decision models (TypeSafe's Jev, Liquid AI's d1-ultra, SubQ Snap and Baseten's Elephant) judged each wording of the population, intervention, comparator and outcome against the others; two wordings count as the same when at least three of them agree and none clearly disagrees, and findings count as this question only when all four elements match. Timing, setting and subgroup never split a question: they are shown on each finding.