Cochrane · intervention · CD005516

Enamel etching for bonding fixed orthodontic braces

Hu, H, Li, C, Li, F, et al. · Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews · 2013 · Cochrane Library

Oral HealthOrthodontics2 versionsAMSTAR 2: not assessed
Full textEvery question was extracted from the full review (methods and results), not only its Summary of Findings table.
Questions
9
current version
GRADE rated
1
No studies
4
Included studies
13
as reported
No studies 4 · 44.4%Ungraded 4 · 44.4%Very low 0 · 0%Low 1 · 11.1%Moderate 0 · 0%High 0 · 0%

Ungraded means an effect was reported without a GRADE rating; it is not a gap. No studies means the review found nothing to answer the question. The six categories are a display order, not a score.

Review question

ElementPlanned (methods)Found (results)
PopulationParticipants, both children and adults, with fixed orthodontic brackets attached to their incisors, canines and premolars; excluded individuals with a cleft lip or palate or both, or with other craniofacial deformities/syndromes, and those with hypoplastic or fluorotic teeth417 participants with 7184 teeth/brackets; age ranged from 11 to 36 years, most participants were teenagers
InterventionAny kind of etching materials and techniques used in the intervention group (e.g. self etching primers)Self etching primers (n=11); Transbond Plus SEP (n=10); Ideal 1 SEP (n=1); Transbond Plus SEP as index arm in SEP-versus-SEP comparisons (n=2)
ComparisonDifferent etching materials, times and acid concentrations, or an alternative etching technique in the control groupConventional etchants (n=11); 37% phosphoric acid (n=11); Clearfil Protect Bond SEP (n=1); First Step SEP (n=1)
OutcomesPrimary: bond failure rate of braces (rate at which braces fall off the teeth during treatment). Secondary: presence or absence of decay (decalcification) associated with or around the etching field; participant satisfaction; cost of treatmentBond failure rate (n=12); presence or absence of decay (decalcification) (n=2)
Study designsRandomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing different etching materials or different etching techniques, including split-mouth trials using quadrants (even if contralateral quadrants receive the same intervention) but not those randomizing individual teeth or using alternate teethSplit-mouth design (n=10); parallel design (n=3); five studies (split-mouth n=3, parallel n=2) pooled in the meta-analysis
TimingNot specifiedFollow-up ranged from 5 to 37 months

Search date: 2013-03. Databases: Cochrane Oral Health Group's Trials Register; Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL); MEDLINE via OVID; EMBASE via OVID; WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform; National Institutes of Health Clinical Trials Registry (ClinicalTrials.gov); Chinese Biomedical Literature…

Questions and results

Show all 2 versions

Different etching materials (phosphoric acid, polyacrylic acid, maleic acid, etc.), acid concentrations or etching times vs An alternative etching material, concentration or etching time

Population: Children and adults with fixed orthodontic brackets bonded to incisors, canines and premolars
1 question
OutcomeEffectEvidenceStatus / GRADE
Outcome NR
We identified no eligible trial that examined the effects of conventional etchants with respect to different etching concentrations or etching times for the bonding of fixed orthodontic appliances. No eligible RCTs…NRNo studies

Self etching primers (one-step etchant and primer system) vs Conventional etchants (two-step etch and prime method using 37% phosphoric acid)

Population: Children and adults with fixed orthodontic brackets bonded to incisors, canines and premolars
5 questions
OutcomeEffectEvidenceStatus / GRADE
Bond failure rate
5 to 37 months
RR 1.14 [0.75, 1.73]
27 [-49, 143] more per 1000
5 studies · 221 participantsLow
Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision
Damage to the teeth
Damage to the teeth: No studies assessed this outcome.NRNo studies
Cost of treatment
Cost of treatment: No studies assessed this outcome.NRNo studies
Participant satisfaction
Participant satisfaction: No studies assessed this outcome.NRNo studies
Decay (decalcification) associated with or around the etching field
Decay (decalcification) associated with or around the etching field: Only one study (Ghiz 2009) assessed this outcome but data were reported at the tooth level rather than at the participant level and therefore was not…1 study · 25 participantsUngraded

Transbond Plus self etching primer (3M Unitek) vs Clearfil Protect Bond self etching primer (Kuraray Medical)

Population: Children and adults with fixed orthodontic brackets bonded to incisors, canines and premolars
2 questions
OutcomeEffectEvidenceStatus / GRADE
Bond failure rate
Self etching primers versus self etching primers: Two split-mouth studies compared two different SEPs (Noble 2006; Paschos 2009). The failure rates were reported at tooth level rather than at participant level. We…1 studyUngraded
Decay (decalcification) associated with or around the etching field
Decalcification outcomes in Paschos 2009 were reported at tooth level rather than at participant level; the evidence was insufficient to conclude whether or not there is a difference in decalcification between the…1 studyUngraded

Transbond Plus self etching primer (3M Unitek) vs First Step self etching primer (Reliance Orthodontic Products)

Population: Children and adults with fixed orthodontic brackets bonded to incisors, canines and premolars
1 question
OutcomeEffectEvidenceStatus / GRADE
Bond failure rate
Noble 2006 (split-mouth) compared Transbond Plus versus First Step SEP; the bond failure rate was reported at tooth level rather than at participant level and was not amenable to analysis; the evidence was insufficient…1 studyUngraded