Quintessence international (Berlin, Germany : 1985) · 2013
The effectiveness of current dentin desensitizing agents used to treat dental hypersensitivity: a systematic review.
Оценочное исследованиеСтатьяСистематический обзорНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
da Rosa Wellington Luiz de Oliveira, Lund Rafael Guerra, Piva Evandro, da Silva Adriana Fernandes
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE: Dentin desensitizing agents are used in the treatment of dentin hypersensitivity, which is defined as a painful response in the exposed dentin to stimuli that are thermal, evaporative, tactile, osmotic, or chemical. A systematic review was conducted to analyze the clinical effectiveness of current desensitizer with at least 3 months of follow-up.
METHOD AND MATERIALS: Eight electronic databases were searched: MedLine (PubMed), Embase, Lilacs, Ibecs, Web of Science, Scopus, Scielo, and The Cochrane Library. Only those clinical trials published from 2000 to 2012 were included.
RESULTS: A total of 3,029 relevant records were identified. After title and abstract examination, 2,645 articles were excluded. A data extraction form was designed and completed by reviewers from the selected studies for a retrospective comparison. From the 99 studies retrieved for detailed review, only 17 had an evaluation time of at least 3-months follow-up and fulfilled the selection criteria.
CONCLUSION: Cervitec Plus, SE Bond & Protect Liner F, laser, and iontophoresis have shown satisfactory posttreatment results between 3 and 6 months. However, additional clinical trials are warranted to better compare the different types of treatments and their effectiveness in the longer term.
METHOD AND MATERIALS: Eight electronic databases were searched: MedLine (PubMed), Embase, Lilacs, Ibecs, Web of Science, Scopus, Scielo, and The Cochrane Library. Only those clinical trials published from 2000 to 2012 were included.
RESULTS: A total of 3,029 relevant records were identified. After title and abstract examination, 2,645 articles were excluded. A data extraction form was designed and completed by reviewers from the selected studies for a retrospective comparison. From the 99 studies retrieved for detailed review, only 17 had an evaluation time of at least 3-months follow-up and fulfilled the selection criteria.
CONCLUSION: Cervitec Plus, SE Bond & Protect Liner F, laser, and iontophoresis have shown satisfactory posttreatment results between 3 and 6 months. However, additional clinical trials are warranted to better compare the different types of treatments and their effectiveness in the longer term.