Findings

What do systematic reviews say?

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

179 questions · 212 findings · 21 reviews · All outcomes

No studies found 3 · 1.4%GRADE not reported 135 · 63.7%Very low 17 · 8%Low 30 · 14.2%Moderate 27 · 12.7%High 0 · 0%

Electrofulguration + calcium hydroxide (CH) vs Electrofulguration + zinc oxide and eugenol (ZOE)

Radiological failure · Children with extensive decay involving the dental pulp in primary teeth

Electrofulguration + calcium hydroxide (CH) showed no clear difference in radiological failure compared with electrofulguration + zinc oxide and eugenol (ZOE); GRADE not reported.

1 finding from 1 review

Bleaching gel with added remineralising agent (fluoride, calcium, or CPP-ACP) vs Bleaching alone (no remineralising agent)

Enamel resistance to demineralization (microhardness / lesion depth) · Extracted human teeth with early/artificial enamel lesions (in vitro)

Low-quality in vitro evidence suggests remineralising additives may reduce mineral loss, but no firm conclusion can be drawn.

1 finding from 1 review

6% sodium fluoride with 6% calcium fluoride varnish vs no treatment

Remineralisation of early enamel caries · Children with early enamel caries (permanent dentition)

One trial found 6% sodium fluoride plus 6% calcium fluoride varnish significantly reversed early enamel caries versus no treatment; ungraded and not meta-analysed.

1 finding from 1 review

ACP light-cure adhesive vs Conventional/control orthodontic adhesive (e.g., Transbond XT) or negative control

Enamel demineralization (DIAGNOdent score) · Patients undergoing fixed orthodontic (fixed appliance) treatment (adolescents and adults, ages 12 to 35)

A single triple-blinded RCT found the ACP-containing adhesive reduced enamel demineralization versus a conventional adhesive over 6 months (ungraded).

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

Calcium phosphate agent (e.g., CPP-ACP, Ca/P-PILP, niobophosphate) 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, Calcium Phosphate vs Control showed no significant difference in 24 h bond strength (MD 1.539, 95% CI -1.738 to 4.817; Moderate certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

nCaF2 primer vs Control Transbond primer

White spot lesions assessed by laser fluorescence (DIAGNOdent) · Patients undergoing fixed orthodontic (fixed appliance) treatment (adolescents and adults, ages 12 to 35)

A single small split-mouth RCT found the nCaF2-containing primer reduced demineralization (DIAGNOdent) but showed no significant clinical white spot lesion difference at debonding (ungraded).

1 finding from 1 review

Partial pulpotomy with tri-calcium silicate material (MTA or Biodentine) 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

Partial pulpotomy with MTA or Biodentine had a pooled success rate of 86.8%.

1 finding from 1 review

Bleaching gel with added remineralising agent (fluoride, calcium, or CPP-ACP) vs Bleaching alone (no remineralising agent)

Whitening (bleaching) efficacy · Demineralised / white-spot-lesion enamel (in vitro specimens)

Low-quality in vitro evidence indicates that adding fluoride or other remineralising agents does not impair the whitening/bleaching effect (ungraded).

1 finding from 1 review

Bleaching gel with added remineralising agent (fluoride, calcium, or CPP-ACP) vs Bleaching alone (no remineralising agent)

Enamel mineral loss / remineralisation · Demineralised / white-spot-lesion enamel (in vitro specimens)

Low-quality in vitro evidence indicates that adding fluoride, calcium or CPP-ACP to bleaching agents can reduce enamel mineral loss (ungraded).

1 finding from 1 review

Orthodontic adhesive/composite containing nano-calcium fluoride (n-CaF2), alone or with DMAHDM vs Conventional/control orthodontic adhesive (e.g., Transbond XT) or negative control

Enamel remineralization extent · Human enamel specimens around orthodontic brackets (in vitro)

In vitro, a nano-CaF2-containing orthodontic cement showed significant enamel remineralization versus control in a single study (ungraded).

1 finding from 1 review

Orthodontic adhesives containing nano-amorphous calcium phosphate (n-ACP) particles/nanoparticles vs Conventional/control orthodontic adhesive (e.g., Transbond XT) or negative control

Enamel remineralization extent · Human enamel specimens around orthodontic brackets (in vitro)

In vitro, n-ACP-containing orthodontic adhesives showed significant enamel remineralization versus control in both studies, but evidence is weak (only 2 studies; ungraded).

1 finding from 1 review

Experimental orthodontic adhesive containing amorphous fluorinated calcium phosphate nanoparticles (n-AFCP) vs Conventional/control orthodontic adhesive (e.g., Transbond XT) or negative control

Enamel remineralization extent and color change · Human enamel specimens around orthodontic brackets (in vitro)

In vitro, an n-AFCP-containing orthodontic primer showed significant enamel remineralization and less color change versus control in a single study (ungraded).

1 finding from 1 review

Dental cavity liner (e.g. calcium hydroxide, glass ionomer, resin-modified glass ionomer, or flowable composite) placed under the restoration vs No liner (resin-based composite bonded directly to the tooth)

Postoperative hypersensitivity (POH), patient-reported (dichotomous yes/no) · Adults or children with a Class I or Class II resin-based composite restoration in a permanent posterior tooth

Dental cavity liner (e.g. calcium hydroxide, glass ionomer,… showed no clear difference in postoperative hypersensitivity (POH), patient-reported (dichotomous… compared with no liner (resin-based composite bonded directly to the tooth) (low certainty).

3 findings from 1 review

Dental cavity liner (e.g. calcium hydroxide, glass ionomer, resin-modified glass ionomer, or flowable composite) placed under the restoration vs No liner (resin-based composite bonded directly to the tooth)

Postoperative hypersensitivity (POH), cold response measurement (time in seconds) · Adults or children with a Class I or Class II resin-based composite restoration in a permanent posterior tooth

Dental cavity liner (e.g. calcium hydroxide, glass ionomer,… may leads to higher postoperative hypersensitivity (POH), cold response measurement… compared with no liner (resin-based composite bonded directly to the tooth) (low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Dental cavity liner (e.g. calcium hydroxide, glass ionomer, resin-modified glass ionomer, or flowable composite) placed under the restoration vs No liner (resin-based composite bonded directly to the tooth)

Restoration failure · Adults or children with a Class I or Class II resin-based composite restoration in a permanent posterior tooth
2 findings from 1 review

Dental cavity liner (e.g. calcium hydroxide, glass ionomer, resin-modified glass ionomer, or flowable composite) placed under the restoration vs No liner (resin-based composite bonded directly to the tooth)

Cost of materials · Adults or children with a Class I or Class II resin-based composite restoration in a permanent posterior tooth
1 finding from 1 review