Journal of dentistry · 2024
Clinical comparison of silver diamine fluoride (SDF) or silver-modified atraumatic restorative technique (SMART) on hypomineralised permanent molars with initial carious lesions: 3-year results of a prospective, randomised trial.
СтатьяРандомизированное исследованиеСравнительное исследованиеПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАНазвание 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.
Erbas Unverdi Gizem, Ballikaya Elif, Cehreli Zafer C
Аннотация
OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to assess the clinical outcomes of utilizing silver diamine fluoride + potassium iodide (SDF + KI) treatment and Silver-Modified Atraumatic Restorative Technique (SMART/SDF + KI + Glass Ionomer Cement) over a three-year period on hypomineralised permanent molars with initial carious lesions.
METHODS: 112 hypomineralised permanent molars with ICDAS 1 or 2 lesions were selected in 48 children. The teeth were randomized into SDF + KI and SMART (SDF + KI + GIC) groups (n = 56 teeth/group) in a split-mouth design. Hypersensitivity and caries development were evaluated in both groups. Schiff Cold Air Sensitivity Scale (SCASS) was used for evaluation of hypersensitivity, and the modified USPHS criteria were utilised for clinical assessments of SMART sealants at 1,6,12,18,24 and 36 months. Fisher's Exact test, Kaplan-Meier Survival Curves, Log-rank test, Mann Whitney U test, and Friedman test was performed for the statistical analysis.
RESULTS: The caries preventive effect was 100 %, 67.9 % and 65.4 % for SDF + KI-treated teeth; and 100 %, 97.6 % and 94.7 % for SMART(SDF + KI + GIC)-treated teeth at 12, 24 and 36 months, respectively. The mean survival probabilities for caries-preventive effect were significantly lower in SDF + KI-treated teeth (31.01 months) than SMART-treated teeth (35.61 months), (p < 0.001). Twenty-six molars with initial hypersensitivity due to hypomineralization demonstrated a significant reduction at all evaluation periods compared to baseline SCASS scores (p < 0.001). Additionally, there was no significant difference in hypersensitivity scores between the groups during the re-call periods, and none of the teeth exhibited hypersensitivity at the 18-month and beyond evaluations.
CONCLUSIONS: During the three-year assessment, both groups demonstrated effectiveness in reducing sensitivity in hypomineralised molars. However, SMART (SDF + KI + GIC) sealants offered better protection against tooth decay over time, despite experiencing gradual retention loss.
CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE: Both SMART (SDF + KI + GIC) sealants and SDF + KI proved effective in alleviating hypersensitivity in hypomineralised molars for up to three years. SMART (SDF + KI + GIC) sealants showed greater caries-preventive effect compared to SDF + KI. However, continuous long-term monitoring is crucial due to the gradual decline in retention of SMART (SDF + KI + GIC) sealants.
CLINICALTRIALS REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT03862014.
METHODS: 112 hypomineralised permanent molars with ICDAS 1 or 2 lesions were selected in 48 children. The teeth were randomized into SDF + KI and SMART (SDF + KI + GIC) groups (n = 56 teeth/group) in a split-mouth design. Hypersensitivity and caries development were evaluated in both groups. Schiff Cold Air Sensitivity Scale (SCASS) was used for evaluation of hypersensitivity, and the modified USPHS criteria were utilised for clinical assessments of SMART sealants at 1,6,12,18,24 and 36 months. Fisher's Exact test, Kaplan-Meier Survival Curves, Log-rank test, Mann Whitney U test, and Friedman test was performed for the statistical analysis.
RESULTS: The caries preventive effect was 100 %, 67.9 % and 65.4 % for SDF + KI-treated teeth; and 100 %, 97.6 % and 94.7 % for SMART(SDF + KI + GIC)-treated teeth at 12, 24 and 36 months, respectively. The mean survival probabilities for caries-preventive effect were significantly lower in SDF + KI-treated teeth (31.01 months) than SMART-treated teeth (35.61 months), (p < 0.001). Twenty-six molars with initial hypersensitivity due to hypomineralization demonstrated a significant reduction at all evaluation periods compared to baseline SCASS scores (p < 0.001). Additionally, there was no significant difference in hypersensitivity scores between the groups during the re-call periods, and none of the teeth exhibited hypersensitivity at the 18-month and beyond evaluations.
CONCLUSIONS: During the three-year assessment, both groups demonstrated effectiveness in reducing sensitivity in hypomineralised molars. However, SMART (SDF + KI + GIC) sealants offered better protection against tooth decay over time, despite experiencing gradual retention loss.
CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE: Both SMART (SDF + KI + GIC) sealants and SDF + KI proved effective in alleviating hypersensitivity in hypomineralised molars for up to three years. SMART (SDF + KI + GIC) sealants showed greater caries-preventive effect compared to SDF + KI. However, continuous long-term monitoring is crucial due to the gradual decline in retention of SMART (SDF + KI + GIC) sealants.
CLINICALTRIALS REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT03862014.