Intervention not reported
Treatment failure (time-to-failure, 7 years)
1 finding from 1 review
no estimate extracted
1 study
GRADE not reported
Radiographic proximal caries lesion progression · Children with non-cavitated proximal caries lesions in primary teeth (ages 5-8)
In one trial, glass ionomer varnish showed no statistically significant difference versus non-invasive care in radiographic proximal caries progression (OR 0.58, CI includes 1; ungraded subgroup).
1 finding from 1 review
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
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 interventions in the management of proximal caries lesions in primary and permanent teeth- systematic… 2025 All outcomesBaseline and follow-up · Multiple countries (Brazil, Saudi Arabia, Netherlands, USA, Turkey, Switzerland, Germany, New Zealand, Chile, Thailand); dental clinic/community settings
Reported narratively by 3 trials (Arthur 2018, Sarti 2020, Jorge 2019). No adverse events were attributed to microinvasive treatment. Gingival bleeding index: no significant difference in Arthur 2018 and Jorge 2019 but…
3 studies
GRADE not reported
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
Radiographic proximal caries lesion progression · Children and adults with non-cavitated proximal (interproximal) caries lesions in primary and/or permanent teeth (ages 3-45)
No eligible studies compared microinvasive techniques with invasive (restorative) treatment; this planned comparison had zero included studies.
1 finding from 1 review
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
Intervention not reported
Radiographic progression of proximal caries lesions
1 finding from 1 review
no estimate extracted
Studies not reported
GRADE not reported
Intervention not reported
Radiographic progression of proximal caries lesions
1 finding from 1 review
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
Radiographic proximal caries lesion progression · Children with lesions in both primary and permanent teeth (ages 8-10)
In one trial including both primary and permanent teeth, proximal sealing reduced radiographic caries progression versus no intervention (OR 0.16; ungraded subgroup).
1 finding from 1 review
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
Length of hospital stay · People of any age with a confirmed diagnosis, by clinical examination and biopsy, of oral submucous fibrosis (OSF)
The review found no eligible studies for this question.
1 finding from 1 review
Maximal mouth opening (interincisal distance) · People of any age with a confirmed diagnosis, by clinical examination and biopsy, of oral submucous fibrosis (OSF)
It is very uncertain whether physiotherapy (tongue-spatula jaw exercises) changes maximal mouth opening (interincisal distance) compared with no active treatment (very low certainty).
1 finding from 1 review
Severity of joint noise · People with temporomandibular disorders (TMD)
The review found no eligible studies for this question.
1 finding from 1 review
Self-reported joint pain when chewing · People with temporomandibular disorders (TMD)
The review found no eligible studies for this question.
1 finding from 1 review
Range of mandibular motion · People with temporomandibular disorders (TMD)
Occlusal splint showed no clear difference in range of mandibular motion compared with acupuncture; GRADE not reported.
1 finding from 1 review
Joint pain at rest · People with temporomandibular disorders (TMD)
It is very uncertain whether occlusal splint changes joint pain at rest compared with no treatment or placebo (non-occlusal or transparent-foil placebo… (very low certainty).
1 finding from 1 review
Maximal mouth opening (interincisal distance) · People of any age with a confirmed diagnosis, by clinical examination and biopsy, of oral submucous fibrosis (OSF)
Intralesional steroid injection plus adjunctive treatment showed no clear difference in maximal mouth opening (interincisal distance) compared with intralesional steroid injection alone (low certainty).
2 findings from 1 review
Maximal mouth opening (interincisal distance) · People of any age with a confirmed diagnosis, by clinical examination and biopsy, of oral submucous fibrosis (OSF)
It is very uncertain whether topical curcumin gel changes maximal mouth opening (interincisal distance) compared with topical aloe vera gel (very low certainty).
1 finding from 1 review