Search

What do systematic reviews say?

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

145 questions · 179 findings · 24 reviews

No studies found 27 · 15.1%GRADE not reported 121 · 67.6%Very low 14 · 7.8%Low 3 · 1.7%Moderate 14 · 7.8%High 0 · 0%

Fluoride varnish vs placebo

Caries increment, surface index D(M)FS · Children or adolescents

In the illustrative network meta-regression the SMD for caries increment showed a treatment-by-year interaction and differed between fluoride in varnish and placebo at randomization years 1954 to 1980; certainty was not graded.

1 finding from 1 review

Silver diamine fluoride (SDF) vs Fluoride varnish

Primary caries prevention · Children and adults (with or without carious lesions)

It is very uncertain whether silver diamine fluoride (SDF) changes primary caries prevention compared with fluoride varnish (very low certainty).

3 findings from 1 review

Silver diamine fluoride (SDF) vs Fluoride varnish

Secondary prevention of caries · Children and adults (with or without carious lesions)

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

3 findings from 1 review

Silver diamine fluoride (SDF) vs Glass ionomer cement (GIC) plus fluoride varnish

Caries arrest · Children and adults (with or without carious lesions)

It is very uncertain whether silver diamine fluoride (SDF) changes caries arrest compared with glass ionomer cement (GIC) plus fluoride varnish (very low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Silver diamine fluoride (SDF) vs Fluoride varnish

Caries arrest · Children and adults (with or without carious lesions)

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

3 findings from 1 review

Silver diamine fluoride (SDF) vs Silver nitrate plus fluoride varnish

Caries arrest · Children and adults (with or without carious lesions)

Silver diamine fluoride (SDF) showed no clear difference in caries arrest compared with silver nitrate plus fluoride varnish (low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Fluoride-releasing resin-based sealant vs Non-invasive measures (fluoride varnish; no intervention)

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 2 trials, resin-based sealants reduced radiographic proximal caries progression versus non-invasive measures (OR 0.24; ungraded subgroup).

1 finding from 1 review

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

Fluoride varnish combined with fluoride toothpaste vs Fluoride toothpaste alone

Unacceptability of treatment (drop-outs / leaving study early) · Children and adolescents aged 16 years or less

Fluoride varnish combined with fluoride toothpaste showed no clear difference in unacceptability of treatment (drop-outs / leaving study early) compared with fluoride toothpaste alone; GRADE not reported.

1 finding from 1 review

Fluoride supplementation (tablets, drops, lozenges or chewing gum) vs Topical fluoride (fluoride rinse, varnish or toothpaste)

Caries increment in permanent teeth · Children and adolescents aged 16 years or less
2 findings from 1 review

Fluoride varnish vs CPP-ACP

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…

Fluoride varnish did not differ significantly from CPP-ACP (SMD -0.07, 95% CI -0.44 to 0.29); certainty of evidence not assessed (no GRADE).

1 finding from 1 review

Fluoride varnish vs CPP-ACFP

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…

Fluoride varnish did not differ significantly from CPP-ACFP (SMD 0.18, 95% CI -0.29 to 0.64); certainty of evidence not assessed (no GRADE).

1 finding from 1 review

Fluoride varnish vs Placebo or no active treatment

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…

Fluoride varnish (gold standard) did not differ significantly from control (SMD -0.25, 95% CI -0.51 to 0.02); certainty of evidence not assessed (no GRADE).

1 finding from 1 review