Findings

What do systematic reviews say?

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

20 questions · 28 findings · 8 reviews · Oral Health · All outcomes

No studies found 5 · 17.9%GRADE not reported 20 · 71.4%Very low 2 · 7.1%Low 1 · 3.6%Moderate 0 · 0%High 0 · 0%

Fibre-optic transillumination (FOTI) vs Histological validation (serial sectioning, grinding, hemisection, or microradiography)

Diagnostic accuracy for occlusal caries detection at the dentin caries detection level (D0-2 versus D3-4) · Extracted human permanent posterior teeth (premolars and molars), occlusal (pit-and-fissure) surfaces

In in vitro, fibre-optic transillumination pooled specificity was 0.97 (95% CI 0.89 to 0.994) for occlusal caries at the dentin detection level; ungraded.

4 findings from 1 review
Show 1 more finding

Fibre-optic transillumination (FOTI) vs Histological validation (serial sectioning, grinding, hemisection, or microradiography)

Diagnostic accuracy for occlusal caries detection at the caries detection level (D0 versus D1-D4) · Extracted human permanent posterior teeth (premolars and molars), occlusal (pit-and-fissure) surfaces

In in vitro, fibre-optic transillumination pooled sensitivity was 0.97 (95% CI -0.92 to 0.99) for occlusal caries at the caries detection level; ungraded.

4 findings from 1 review
Show 1 more finding

Fibre-optic transillumination (FOTI) vs Histological validation (in vitro) or direct visual examination after tooth separation / bioptical cavity preparation (in vivo)

detection of proximal caries · Permanent posterior teeth, proximal surfaces (in vitro extracted teeth and in vivo patients)

For fibre-optic transillumination (FOTI), studies were identified (in vitro N=4, in vivo N=3) but none had sufficiently low risk of bias and adequate reporting to be pooled; no meta-analytic estimate could be derived.

1 finding from 1 review

Fibre-reinforced composite fixed (bonded) retainer vs Multistrand / spiral wire fixed (bonded) retainer

Patient satisfaction (measured by patient satisfaction or aesthetic scales) · People who had received fixed appliance orthodontic treatment

It is very uncertain whether fibre-reinforced composite fixed (bonded) retainer changes patient satisfaction: aesthetics (VAS 0-10 cm, lower arch) compared with multistrand / spiral wire fixed (bonded) retainer (very low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Fibre-reinforced composite fixed (bonded) retainer vs Multistrand / spiral wire fixed (bonded) retainer

Survival of retainers (failure, lower arch) · People who had received fixed appliance orthodontic treatment

Fibre-reinforced composite fixed (bonded) retainer showed no clear difference in survival of retainers (failure, lower arch) compared with multistrand / spiral wire fixed (bonded) retainer (low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Fibre-reinforced composite fixed (bonded) retainer vs Multistrand / spiral wire fixed (bonded) retainer

Adverse effects on oral health: bleeding on probing (lower arch) · People who had received fixed appliance orthodontic treatment

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

1 finding from 1 review

Fibre-reinforced composite fixed (bonded) retainer vs Multistrand / spiral wire fixed (bonded) retainer

Survival: mean survival time (lower arch, months) · People who had received fixed appliance orthodontic treatment

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

1 finding from 1 review

Fibre-reinforced composite fixed (bonded) retainer vs Multistrand / spiral wire fixed (bonded) retainer

Stability: Little's Irregularity Index (lower arch) · People who had received fixed appliance orthodontic treatment

It is very uncertain whether fibre-reinforced composite fixed (bonded) retainer changes stability: Little's Irregularity Index (lower arch) compared with multistrand / spiral wire fixed (bonded) retainer (very low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Fibre-reinforced composite fixed (bonded) retainer vs Multistrand / spiral wire fixed (bonded) retainer

Adverse effects on oral health: Gingival Index (lower arch) · People who had received fixed appliance orthodontic treatment

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

1 finding from 1 review

Non-metal carbon-fibre post and core (Category III; Composipost) vs Metal custom-cast post and core (Category I)

Clinical/technical failure (root fracture) · Participants with permanent endodontically-treated (root-filled) teeth for which a post is indicated to retain the final restoration

Non-metal carbon-fibre post and core (Category III; Composipost) led to lower clinical/technical failure (root fracture) compared with metal custom-cast post and core (Category I; gold alloy); GRADE not reported.

1 finding from 1 review

Fibre-optic transillumination (FOTI) vs Reference standard (histology, excavation, radiographs/microCT, or tooth separation)

Sensitivity for detection and diagnosis of early (enamel) caries · Asymptomatic children, adolescents, or adults presenting for clinical examination (in vivo studies), or extracted teeth of children or…
1 finding from 1 review

Fibre-optic transillumination (FOTI) vs Reference standard (histology, excavation, radiographs/microCT, or tooth separation)

Specificity for detection and diagnosis of early (enamel) caries · Asymptomatic children, adolescents, or adults presenting for clinical examination (in vivo studies), or extracted teeth of children or…
1 finding from 1 review

Fibre-optic transillumination (FOTI, including white light scattering and near infrared) vs Reference standard: histology or enhanced visual-tactile examination

Outcome not reported · Adults presenting asymptomatically or suspected of having root caries (in vivo); extracted teeth of adults (in vitro)

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

1 finding from 1 review

Composite strip crown (CSC) with a post (microhybrid composite resin, Amelogen) vs Post type: composite post (CP) vs fibre post (FP) vs reverse metal post (RMP)

Treatment failure (annual failure rate) · Children with severely decayed maxillary primary incisors treated by pulpectomy (non-vital pulp therapy)

Composite strip crowns with composite posts had a low annual failure rate (2.3%) in maxillary primary incisors after pulpectomy (single high-risk-of-bias RCT; low quality of evidence; not GRADE-rated).

3 findings from 1 review

Direct composite resin restoration vs Full-coverage metal-ceramic crown

Clinical failure (post dislodgement) · Participants with endodontically-treated permanent premolars restored with a carbon-fibre post (Category III)

Direct composite restoration (final restoration) showed no clear difference in clinical failure (post dislodgement) compared with full-coverage metal-ceramic crown; GRADE not reported.

1 finding from 1 review