evidencegaps
Findings

What do systematic reviews say?

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

3 questions · 3 findings · 1 reviews · Oral Health

Sort:Best matchNewestHighest certaintyDownload CSV
No studies found 1 · 33.3%GRADE not reported 2 · 66.7%Very low 0 · 0%Low 0 · 0%Moderate 0 · 0%High 0 · 0%

Gastroesophageal or laryngopharyngeal reflux (GERD/LPR) vs Healthy individuals without reflux (controls)

Dental erosion · Adults with gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) or laryngopharyngeal reflux (LPR)

Reflux (GERD/LPR) is associated with a higher prevalence and severity of dental erosion than in healthy individuals, but the evidence is heterogeneous, not pooled, and ungraded.

1 finding from 1 review

Gastroesophageal or laryngopharyngeal reflux (GERD/LPR) vs Healthy controls

Salivary function impairment (buffering capacity, flow rate, oral pH) · Adults with gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) or laryngopharyngeal reflux (LPR)

Reflux is associated with impaired salivary function (notably reduced buffering capacity) as a proposed pathophysiological mechanism, based on several ungraded studies.

1 finding from 1 review
  • Laryngopharyngeal reflux, gastroesophageal reflux and dental disorders: A systematic review. 2020 All outcomes
    Adult patients in gastroenterology, ENT and dental clinical settings
    Mixed/controversial salivary findings: reduced salivary buffering capacity supported in three studies (Correa, Holbrook, Filipi) with low oral pH and reduced flow as additional factors in GERD patients, but Meurman and Schroeder found no significant salivary abnormalities; no pooled estimate.
    6 studies
    GRADE not reported

Gastroesophageal or laryngopharyngeal reflux (GERD/LPR) vs Healthy controls

Oral/pharyngeal microbiota modifications · Adults with gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) or laryngopharyngeal reflux (LPR)

No eligible studies investigated reflux-related modifications of the oral or pharyngeal microbiota; this is an evidence gap identified by the review.

1 finding from 1 review