Search

What do systematic reviews say?

Refine by population, intervention, comparison or outcome
More filters
Evidence found and GRADE certainty

7 questions · 7 findings · 2 reviews

No studies found 0 · 0%GRADE not reported 6 · 85.7%Very low 0 · 0%Low 0 · 0%Moderate 1 · 14.3%High 0 · 0%

Microinvasive techniques (resin infiltration or glass ionomer varnish) vs Non-invasive measures (fluoride varnish/toothpaste, flossing, oral hygiene instruction, sham/standard of care)

Radiographic proximal caries lesion progression · Children with non-cavitated proximal caries lesions in primary teeth (ages 3-9)

In primary teeth (5 trials), microinvasive techniques reduced radiographic proximal caries progression versus non-invasive measures (OR 0.38; ungraded subgroup).

1 finding from 1 review

Microinvasive techniques (resin infiltration, resin/GIC sealant, or glass ionomer varnish) vs Non-invasive measures (fluoride varnish/toothpaste, flossing, oral hygiene instruction, sham/standard of care)

Radiographic proximal caries lesion progression · Children and adults with non-cavitated proximal (interproximal) caries lesions in primary and/or permanent teeth (ages 3-45)

Microinvasive techniques probably reduce radiographic progression of non-cavitated proximal caries lesions compared with non-invasive measures (moderate certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Resin infiltration vs Non-invasive measures (fluoride varnish/toothpaste, flossing, oral hygiene instruction, sham/standard of care)

Radiographic proximal caries lesion progression · Children and adults with non-cavitated proximal (interproximal) caries lesions in primary and/or permanent teeth (ages 3-45)

Pooling 10 trials, resin infiltration reduced radiographic proximal caries progression versus non-invasive measures (OR 0.23); this subgroup was not separately GRADE-rated.

1 finding from 1 review

Microinvasive techniques (resin infiltration, resin/GIC sealant, or glass ionomer varnish) vs Non-invasive measures (fluoride varnish/toothpaste, flossing, oral hygiene instruction, sham/standard of care)

Adverse events and periodontal/secondary outcomes (gingival bleeding, gingival bleeding index, visible plaque index) · Children and adults with non-cavitated proximal (interproximal) caries lesions in primary and/or permanent teeth (ages 3-45)

Only three trials reported secondary/adverse outcomes; no adverse events were attributed to microinvasive treatment and periodontal findings were mixed and not pooled (ungraded).

1 finding from 1 review

Microinvasive techniques (mostly resin infiltration; incl. resin sealant) vs Non-invasive measures (fluoride varnish/toothpaste, flossing, oral hygiene instruction, sham/standard of care)

Radiographic proximal caries lesion progression · Children and adults with non-cavitated proximal caries lesions in permanent teeth (ages 11-45)

In permanent teeth (7 trials), microinvasive techniques reduced radiographic proximal caries progression versus non-invasive measures (OR 0.18; ungraded subgroup).

1 finding from 1 review

Resin infiltration vs Fluoride varnish

Remineralization / reduction in lesion severity (change in QLF, laser fluorescence, or lesion area) · Patients with white spot lesions / early caries lesions (WSLs/ECLs), including orthodontic and non-orthodontic lesions, active caries…

Resin infiltration was significantly better than fluoride varnish (SMD -0.70, 95% CI -1.18 to -0.21); certainty of evidence not assessed (no GRADE).

1 finding from 1 review

Resin infiltration vs P11-4 + fluoride varnish

Remineralization / reduction in lesion severity (change in QLF, laser fluorescence, or lesion area) · Patients with white spot lesions / early caries lesions (WSLs/ECLs), including orthodontic and non-orthodontic lesions, active caries…

Resin infiltration and P11-4 plus fluoride varnish did not differ significantly (SMD 0.01, 95% CI -0.62 to 0.65; indirect evidence only); certainty of evidence not assessed (no GRADE).

1 finding from 1 review