1. |
- Abdulraheem, Salem, et al.
(author)
-
Do fixed orthodontic appliances cause halitosis? A systematic review
- 2019
-
In: BMC Oral Health. - : BioMed Central. - 1472-6831. ; 19:1
-
Research review (peer-reviewed)abstract
- Objective: To examine: (I) the current evidence of the impact of fixed orthodontic appliances on the development of halitosis in patients undergoing orthodontic treatment, and (II) the influence of different orthodontic bracket systems on halitosis. Material and methods: Three electronic databases (PubMed, Scopus, and Cochrane Library) were searched prior to March 15, 2018. The review was systematically conducted and reported according to the Cochrane Handbook and the PRISMA statement. Only Randomised Clinical Trials (RCTs) were considered. Selected full-text papers were independently assessed by four investigators and any disagreements were resolved by consensus. The Cochrane Handbook was used to grade the risk of bias and the quality of evidence was rated according to GRADE. Results: Out of 363 identified studies, three RCTs on halitosis and fixed orthodontic appliances met the inclusion criteria. The risk of bias in the three studies was rated as high and the quality of evidence was rated as very low. Conclusions/clinical implications: There is a lack of scientific evidence that subjects with fixed orthodontic appliances develop halitosis during treatment. Additional well-conducted RCTs with extended periods of assessment are needed as well as consensus concerning cut-off values for the diagnosis of halitosis.
|
|
2. |
- Cagetti, M. G., et al.
(author)
-
Are standardized caries risk assessment models effective in assessing actual caries status and future caries increment? A systematic review
- 2018
-
In: Bmc Oral Health. - : Springer Science and Business Media LLC. - 1472-6831. ; 18
-
Research review (peer-reviewed)abstract
- Background: Assessing caries risk is an essential element in the planning of preventive and therapeutic strategies. Different caries risk assessment (CRA) models have been proposed for the identification of individuals running a risk of future caries. This systematic review was designed to evaluate whether standardized caries risk assessment (CRA) models are able to evaluate the risk according to the actual caries status and/or the future caries increment. Methods: Randomized clinical trials, cross-sectional studies, cohort studies, comparative studies, validation studies and evaluation studies, reporting caries risk assessment using standardized models (Cariogram, CAMBRA, PreViser, NUS-CRA and CAT) in patients of any age related to caries data recorded by DMFT/S or ICDAS indices, were included. PubMed, Scopus and Embase were searched from 2000 to 2016. A search string was developed. All the papers meeting the inclusion criteria were subjected to a quality assessment. Results: One thousand three-undred ninety-two papers were identified and 32 were included. In all but one, the Cariogram was used both as sole model or in conjunction with other models. All the papers on children (n = 16) and adults (n = 12) found a statistically significant association between the risk levels and the actual caries status and/or the future caries increment. Nineteen papers, all using the Cariogram except one, were classified as being of good quality. Three of four papers comprising children and adults found a positive association. For seven of the included papers, Cariogram sensibility and specificity were calculated; sensibility ranged from low (41.0) to fairly low (75.0), while specificity was higher, ranging from 65.8 to 88.0. Wide 95% confidence intervals for both parameters were found, indicating that the reliability of the model differed in different caries risk levels. Conclusions: The scientific evidence relating to standardized CRA models is still limited; even if Cariogram was tested in children and adults in few studies of good quality, no sufficient evidence is available to affirm the method is effective in caries assessment and prediction. New options of diagnosis, prognosis and therapy are now available to dentists but the validity of standardized CRA models still remains limited.
|
|
3. |
- Dahlén, Gunnar, 1944, et al.
(author)
-
Current concepts and an alternative perspective on periodontal disease.
- 2020
-
In: BMC oral health. - : Springer Science and Business Media LLC. - 1472-6831. ; 20:1
-
Research review (peer-reviewed)abstract
- Epidemiological data from countries worldwide show a consistent pattern implying that a fraction of around 10% of those over 40-50years in all populations will exhibit severe periodontitis with the potential risk of losing teeth during their life-time. The subgingival microbiota shows striking similarities between populations irrespective of disease severity and can only marginally explain the clinical pattern. It is also difficult to explain this pattern by genetic and acquired risk factors such as systemic disease (e.g. diabetes) or habits (e.g. smoking) even if they may have a confounding effect on the disease.Inflammation of the gingiva appears to be a normal and physiological response to the presence of commensal bacteria along the gingival crevice and in the dental biofilm. Over many years of exposure to the dental biofilm, the chronic inflammation in the gingiva gradually results in a loss of attachment and bone loss. Numerous laboratory and clinical studies have provided insight into the potential role of determinants that are associated with periodontitis. However, it has been difficult to relate the findings to the pattern of the distribution of the disease observed in epidemiological studies. We propose a simple and parsimonious model that considers all the multitude of potential determinants as creating effectively random noise within the dental biofilm to which the tissues react by accumulating the effects of this noise.We suggest that such a model can explain many of the epidemiological features of periodontal breakdown over time, and we discuss its clinical implications.
|
|
4. |
- Olsson, Magnus, et al.
(author)
-
Does smoking cessation affect postoperative healing following oral surgery among smokers? : a systematic review
- 2024
-
In: BMC Oral Health. - : BioMed Central (BMC). - 1472-6831. ; 24:1
-
Research review (peer-reviewed)abstract
- BackgroundIt is well documented that smokers suffer increased risk of postoperative complications after medical surgery, for example delayed healing and increased risk of infection. It is also known that preoperative smoking cessation can reduce the risk of these complications. Because of this there are guidelines regarding preoperative smoking cessation in non-oral medical surgery. There are however no specific guidelines regarding oral surgical procedures, such as surgical extractions, dentoalveolar surgery, periodontal surgery, or dental implantation. Nevertheless, it is common that dentists and oral surgeons recommend smoking cessation pre to oral surgical procedures. The aim with this systematic review was to see if there are any evidence in the literature, supporting preoperative smoking cessation in oral surgical procedures.MethodsA systematic search of the electronic databases PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, and Cochrane was conducted to identify studies addressing the effect of preoperative smoking cessation in oral surgical procedures. Included publications were subjected to preidentified inclusion criterion. Six examiners performed the eligibility and quality assessment of relevant studies. Risk of bias was assessed using ROBINS-I and RoB 2. Certainty assessment was carried out using GRADE.ResultsThe initial search resulted in 2255 records, and after removal of 148 duplicates, 16 articles met an acceptable level of relevance. These were read in full text, whereof 12 articles were excluded, due to different intervention, outcome, or study design than stated in the review protocol. One study remained with moderate risk of bias and three were excluded due to high risk of bias.ConclusionThis systematic review could not determine the effect of smoking cessation pre to oral surgical procedures, in smokers. This indicates lack of knowledge in the effects of smoking cessation. We also conclude a lack of knowledge in how to design smoking cessation in the most effective way.
|
|
5. |
- Sonesson, Mikael, et al.
(author)
-
Efficacy of low-level laser therapy in accelerating tooth movement, preventing relapse and managing acute pain during orthodontic treatment in humans : a systematic review
- 2016
-
In: BMC Oral Health. - : BioMed Central. - 1472-6831. ; 17:11
-
Research review (peer-reviewed)abstract
- Background: Recently low-level laser therapy (LLLT) has been proposed to improve orthodontic treatment. The aims of this systematic review were to investigate the scientific evidence to support applications of LLLT: (a) to accelerate tooth movement, (b) to prevent orthodontic relapse and (c) to modulate acute pain, during treatment with fixed appliances in children and young adults. Methods: To ensure a systematic literature approach, this systematic review was conducted to Goodman's four step model. Three databases were searched (Medline, Cochrane Controlled Clinical Trials Register and Scitation), using predetermined search terms. The quality of evidence was rated according to the GRADE system Results: The search identified 244 articles, 16 of which fulfilled the inclusion criteria: three on acceleration of tooth movement by LLLT and 13 on LLLT modulation of acute pain. No study on LLLT for prevention of relapse was identified. The selected studies reported promising results for LLLT; elevated acceleration of tooth movement and lower pain scores, than controls. With respect to method, there were wide variations in type of laser techniques Conclusions: The quality of evidence supporting LLLT to accelerate orthodontic tooth movement is very low and low with respect to modulate acute pain. No studies met the inclusion criteria for evaluating LLLT to limit relapse. The results highlight the need for high quality research, with consistency in study design, to determine whether LLLT can enhance fixed appliance treatment in children and young adults.
|
|