Findings

What do systematic reviews say?

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

106 questions · 127 findings · 11 reviews · All outcomes

No studies found 1 · 0.8%GRADE not reported 59 · 46.5%Very low 6 · 4.7%Low 20 · 15.7%Moderate 41 · 32.3%High 0 · 0%

Immediate-delayed implants (placed within 8 weeks after tooth extraction) vs Delayed implants (placed at least 2 months after extraction)

Aesthetics assessed by dentist: position of the perimplant tissues · Patients with compromised teeth to be extracted who require single dental implants in fresh postextraction sockets

Immediate-delayed implants (placed within 8 weeks after tooth… led to higher aesthetics assessed by dentist: position of the perimplant tissues compared with delayed implants (placed at least 2 months after extraction); GRADE not reported.

1 finding from 1 review

Immediate-delayed implants (placed within 8 weeks after tooth extraction) vs Delayed implants (placed at least 2 months after extraction)

Marginal bone level change · Patients with compromised teeth to be extracted who require single dental implants in fresh postextraction sockets

Immediate-delayed implants (placed within 8 weeks after tooth… showed no clear difference in perimplant marginal bone level changes compared with delayed implants (placed at least 2 months after extraction); GRADE not reported.

1 finding from 1 review

Immediate-delayed implants (placed within 8 weeks after tooth extraction) vs Delayed implants (placed at least 2 months after extraction)

Patients' aesthetic perception (satisfaction with crown appearance) · Patients with compromised teeth to be extracted who require single dental implants in fresh postextraction sockets

Immediate-delayed implants (placed within 8 weeks after tooth… showed no clear difference in patients' aesthetic perception (satisfaction with crown appearance) compared with delayed implants (placed at least 2 months after extraction); GRADE not reported.

1 finding from 1 review

Immediate-delayed implants (placed within 8 weeks after tooth extraction) vs Delayed implants (placed at least 2 months after extraction)

Prosthesis failure · Patients with compromised teeth to be extracted who require single dental implants in fresh postextraction sockets

Immediate-delayed implants (placed within 8 weeks after tooth… led to lower prosthesis failure compared with delayed implants (placed at least 2 months after extraction); GRADE not reported.

1 finding from 1 review

Immediate-delayed implants (placed within 8 weeks after tooth extraction) vs Delayed implants (placed at least 2 months after extraction)

Satisfaction with treatment ‐ general · Patients with compromised teeth to be extracted who require single dental implants in fresh postextraction sockets

Immediate-delayed implants (placed within 8 weeks after tooth… led to higher patients' general satisfaction of treatment compared with delayed implants (placed at least 2 months after extraction); GRADE not reported.

1 finding from 1 review

Immediate-delayed implants (placed within 8 weeks after tooth extraction) vs Delayed implants (placed at least 2 months after extraction)

Patients' perception of how long treatment took · Patients with compromised teeth to be extracted who require single dental implants in fresh postextraction sockets

Immediate-delayed implants (placed within 8 weeks after tooth… led to lower patients' perception of how long treatment took compared with delayed implants (placed at least 2 months after extraction); GRADE not reported.

1 finding from 1 review

Immediate implants (placed in a fresh extraction socket just after tooth extraction) vs Delayed implants (placed at least 2 months after extraction)

Marginal bone level change · Patients with compromised teeth to be extracted who require single dental implants in fresh postextraction sockets

Immediate implants (placed in a fresh extraction socket just after… showed no clear difference in perimplant marginal bone level changes compared with delayed implants (placed at least 2 months after extraction, in…; GRADE not reported.

1 finding from 1 review

Immediate implants (placed in a fresh extraction socket just after tooth extraction) vs Delayed implants (placed at least 2 months after extraction)

Prosthesis failure · Patients with compromised teeth to be extracted who require single dental implants in fresh postextraction sockets

Immediate implants (placed in a fresh extraction socket just after… showed no clear difference in prosthesis failure compared with delayed implants (placed at least 2 months after extraction, in…; GRADE not reported.

1 finding from 1 review

Immediate implants (placed in a fresh extraction socket just after tooth extraction) vs Delayed implants (placed at least 2 months after extraction)

Aesthetics assessed by dentist: position of the perimplant tissues · Patients with compromised teeth to be extracted who require single dental implants in fresh postextraction sockets

Immediate implants (placed in a fresh extraction socket just after… led to lower aesthetics assessed by dentist: position of the perimplant tissues compared with delayed implants (placed at least 2 months after extraction, in…; GRADE not reported.

1 finding from 1 review

Immediate implants (placed in a fresh extraction socket just after tooth extraction) vs Delayed implants (placed at least 2 months after extraction)

Implant failure · Patients with compromised teeth to be extracted who require single dental implants in fresh postextraction sockets

Immediate implants (placed in a fresh extraction socket just after… showed no clear difference in implant failure compared with delayed implants (placed at least 2 months after extraction, in…; GRADE not reported.

1 finding from 1 review

Partial pulpotomy with immediate (same-visit) permanent restoration vs No comparator

Overall success (composite of clinical and radiographic success) · Adults aged 18 years or older with mature permanent teeth and carious pulp exposure

Immediate permanent restoration was associated with a pooled success rate of 89.9%.

1 finding from 1 review

Partial pulpotomy with immediate (same-visit) permanent restoration vs Partial pulpotomy with delayed permanent restoration (7-14 days or >14 days)

Overall success (composite of clinical and radiographic success) · Adults (>=18 y) with mature permanent teeth and deep carious pulp exposure

Immediate permanent restoration after partial pulpotomy is associated with much higher success than delayed restoration (89.9% immediate vs 23.2% beyond 14 days; ungraded).

1 finding from 1 review

Mesoporous silica (SiO2) vs Fluoride agent (e.g., NaF/SDF/KF/CaF2)

Immediate (24 h) resin-dentin bond strength (MPa) · Artificial caries-affected dentin (ACAD) in extracted permanent human teeth (in vitro)

In the Self-Etch adhesive + chemical ACAD protocol network, Silica vs Fluorine showed no significant difference in 24 h bond strength (MD 1.441, 95% CI -5.099 to 7.980; Moderate certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Hydroxyapatite (e.g., nano-HAp) vs Calcium-based agent

Immediate (24 h) resin-dentin bond strength (MPa) · Artificial caries-affected dentin (ACAD) in extracted permanent human teeth (in vitro)

In the Self-Etch adhesive + chemical ACAD protocol network, HAp vs Calcium showed no significant difference in 24 h bond strength (MD -1.792, 95% CI -7.415 to 3.831; Low certainty).

2 findings from 1 review

Flavonoids (e.g., quercetin, proanthocyanidin) vs Fluoride agent (e.g., NaF/SDF/KF/CaF2)

Immediate (24 h) resin-dentin bond strength (MPa) · Artificial caries-affected dentin (ACAD) in extracted permanent human teeth (in vitro)

In the Etch-and-Rinse adhesive + biological ACAD protocol network, Flavonoids vs Fluorine showed no significant difference in 24 h bond strength (MD 4.241, 95% CI -2.652 to 11.135; Moderate certainty).

2 findings from 1 review

Self-assembling/remineralizing peptide (e.g., P11-4, PAA-PASP) vs Calcium phosphate agent (e.g., CPP-ACP, Ca/P-PILP, niobophosphate)

Immediate (24 h) resin-dentin bond strength (MPa) · Artificial caries-affected dentin (ACAD) in extracted permanent human teeth (in vitro)

In the Self-Etch adhesive + chemical ACAD protocol network, Peptide vs Calcium Phosphate showed no significant difference in 24 h bond strength (MD -0.009, 95% CI -4.076 to 4.058; Low certainty).

3 findings from 1 review

HEMA/EGDMA-based desensitizer vs No biomimetic remineralization (control)

Immediate (24 h) resin-dentin bond strength (MPa) · Artificial caries-affected dentin (ACAD) in extracted permanent human teeth (in vitro)

In the Self-Etch adhesive + chemical ACAD protocol network, HEMA vs Control showed no significant difference in 24 h bond strength (MD 1.899, 95% CI -3.210 to 7.009; Low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Calcium phosphate agent (e.g., CPP-ACP, Ca/P-PILP, niobophosphate) vs Fluoride agent (e.g., NaF/SDF/KF/CaF2)

Immediate (24 h) resin-dentin bond strength (MPa) · Artificial caries-affected dentin (ACAD) in extracted permanent human teeth (in vitro)

In the Self-Etch adhesive + chemical ACAD protocol network, Calcium Phosphate vs Fluorine showed no significant difference in 24 h bond strength (MD 2.140, 95% CI -1.506 to 5.787; Moderate certainty).

2 findings from 1 review

Self-assembling/remineralizing peptide (e.g., P11-4, PAA-PASP) vs Calcium-based agent

Immediate (24 h) resin-dentin bond strength (MPa) · Artificial caries-affected dentin (ACAD) in extracted permanent human teeth (in vitro)

In the Self-Etch adhesive + chemical ACAD protocol network, Peptide vs Calcium showed no significant difference in 24 h bond strength (MD 2.654, 95% CI -3.216 to 8.524; Moderate certainty).

2 findings from 1 review