scholarly journals Clinical Effectiveness of Bulk-Fill and Conventional Resin Composite Restorations: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Polymers ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 12 (8) ◽  
pp. 1786 ◽  
Author(s):  
Heber Isac Arbildo-Vega ◽  
Barbara Lapinska ◽  
Saurav Panda ◽  
César Lamas-Lara ◽  
Abdul Samad Khan ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Randomized Clinical Trials ◽  
Resin Composite ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Color Stability ◽  
Clinical Effectiveness ◽  
Clinical Effects ◽  
Composite Restorations ◽  
Restoration Technique ◽  
Bibliographic Search

The objective of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to determine the clinical effectiveness of bulk-fill and conventional resin in composite restorations. A bibliographic search was carried out until May 2020, in the biomedical databases Pubmed/MEDLINE, EMBASE, Scopus, CENTRAL and Web of Science. The study selection criteria were: randomized clinical trials, in English, with no time limit, with a follow-up greater than or equal to 6 months and that reported the clinical effects (absence of fractures, absence of discoloration or marginal staining, adequate adaptation marginal, absence of post-operative sensitivity, absence of secondary caries, adequate color stability and translucency, proper surface texture, proper anatomical form, adequate tooth integrity without wear, adequate restoration integrity, proper occlusion, absence of inflammation and adequate point of contact) of restorations made with conventional and bulk resins. The risk of bias of the study was analyzed using the Cochrane Manual of Systematic Reviews of Interventions. Sixteen articles were eligible and included in the study. The results indicated that there is no difference between restorations with conventional and bulk resins for the type of restoration, type of tooth restored and restoration technique used. However, further properly designed clinical studies are required in order to reach a better conclusion.

scholarly journals Clinical effectiveness of drugs in hospitalized patients with COVID-19 infection: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Roberto Ariel Abeldano Zuniga ◽  
Silvia Coca ◽  
Giuliana Abeldano ◽  
Ruth Ana Maria Gonzalez Villoria
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Clinical Improvement ◽  
Low Income ◽  
Randomized Clinical Trials ◽  
Data Extraction ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Clinical Effectiveness ◽  
Hospitalized Patients ◽  
Low Income Countries ◽  
Qualitative Synthesis

Objective. The aim was to assess the clinical effectiveness of drugs used in hospitalized patients with COVID-19 infection. Method. We conducted a systematic review of randomized clinical trials assessing treatment with remdesivir, chloroquine, hydroxychloroquine, lopinavir, ritonavir, dexamethasone, and convalescent plasma, for hospitalized patients with a diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2 infection. The outcomes were mortality, clinical improvement, duration of ventilation, duration of oxygen support, duration of hospitalization), virological clearance, and severe adverse events. Results. A total of 48 studies were retrieved from the databases. Ten articles were finally included in the data extraction and qualitative synthesis of results. The meta-analysis suggests a benefit of dexamethasone versus standard care in the reduction of risk of mortality at day 28; and the clinical improvement at days 14 and 28 in patients treated with remdesivir. Conclusions. Dexamethasone would have a better result in hospitalized patients, especially in low-resources settings. Significance of results. The analysis of the main treatments proposed for hospitalized patients is of vital importance to reduce mortality in low-income countries; since the COVID-19 pandemic had an economic impact worldwide with the loss of jobs and economic decline in countries with scarce resources. Keywords: Drugs; Antivirals; Clinical improvement; Mortality; COVID-19; SARS-CoV2.

Do Tooth- and Cavity-related Aspects of Noncarious Cervical Lesions Affect the Retention of Resin Composite Restorations in Adults? A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

2020 ◽  
Vol 45 (3) ◽  
pp. E124-E140
Author(s):  
AMO Correia ◽  
E Bresciani ◽  
AB Borges ◽  
DM Pereira ◽  
LC Maia ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Latin American ◽  
Randomized Clinical Trials ◽  
Retention Rate ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Grey Literature ◽  
Composite Resins ◽  
Cochrane Library ◽  
Cervical Lesions ◽  
Composite Restorations

SUMMARY Purpose: The purpose was to perform a systematic review and meta-analysis based on the following research question: do tooth- and cavity-related aspects of noncarious cervical lesions (NCCLs) affect the retention of composite restorations? Methods: Randomized clinical trials (RCTs) that evaluated the retention rate of resin restorations in NCCLs were included for the identification and comparison of their characteristics. The search was conducted in PubMed and adapted for Scopus, Web of Science, Latin American and Caribbean Health Sciences Literature database (LILACS), Brazilian Library in Dentistry (BBO), Cochrane Library, and System for Information on Grey Literature in Europe (SIGLE) without restrictions until July 2018. Unpublished and ongoing trial registries were also searched. The Cochrane Collaboration tool was used for assessing risk of bias. The quality of the evidence was graded using the Grading of Recommendations: Assessment, Development and Evaluation. Using the random effects model, a meta-analysis was conducted for each aspect (arch distribution, tooth location, wear facets, dentin sclerosis, shape, size, depth, occluso-gingival distance, and margin location). Results: We retrieved 6738 articles. After removal of duplicates and nonrelevant articles, 24 RCTs remained. The anterior tooth location favored the retention rates of restoration of NCCLs (relative risk [RR], 1.08; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.00-1.16). The presence of wear facets is a risk factor for the retention of restorations (RR, 0.91; 95% CI, 0.83-0.99). The evidence was moderate for arch distribution and low or very low for all other factors because of heterogeneity, imprecision, and inconsistency. Conclusion: The tooth location and the presence of wear facets can affect the retention of composite resins in NCCLs.

scholarly journals Clinical Effectiveness of Pre-treatment with Chlorhexidine in Adhesive Dental Restorations. Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

2021 ◽  
Vol 10 (3) ◽  
pp. 1-10
Author(s):  
Heber Arbildo-Vega ◽  
◽  
Alfredo Rendón-Alvarado ◽  
Fredy Hugo Cruzado-Oliva ◽  
Edward Infantes-Ruíz ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Clinical Trials ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Clinical Effectiveness ◽  
Marginal Adaptation ◽  
Clinical Effects ◽  
Secondary Caries ◽  
Dental Restorations ◽  
Pre Treatment ◽  
Postoperative Sensitivity

Objective: To determine, by means of a systematic review and meta-analysis, the clinical effectiveness of pre-treatment with chlorhexidine (CHX) in adhesive dental restorations. Material and Methods: A literature search was conducted until February 2020, in the biomedical databases: Pubmed, Embase, Scielo, Science Direct, Scopus, SIGLE, LILACS, Google Scholar and the Cochrane Central Registry of Clinical Trials. The selection criteria of the studies were defined, which were: randomized and controlled clinical trials, without language and time restrictions, and reporting the clinical effects (retention, marginal discoloration, marginal adaptation, postoperative sensitivity and secondary caries) of pre-CHX treatment in adhesive dental restorations. Study risk of bias was analyzed using the Cochrane Handbook of Systematic Reviews of Interventions. Results: The search strategy resulted in six articles of which five entered a meta-analysis. The studies reported that there was no difference in retention, marginal discoloration, marginal adaptation, postoperative sensitivity, and secondary caries from pre-treatment with CHX in adhesive dental restorations. Conclusion: The reviewed literature suggests that pretreatment with CHX does not influence the clinical effectiveness in adhesive dental restorations.

scholarly journals Clinical performance of bulk-fill and conventional resin composite restorations in posterior teeth: a systematic review and meta-analysis

2018 ◽  
Vol 23 (1) ◽  
pp. 221-233 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sirley Raiane Mamede Veloso ◽  
Cleidiel Aparecido Araújo Lemos ◽  
Sandra Lúcia Dantas de Moraes ◽  
Belmiro Cavalcanti do Egito Vasconcelos ◽  
Eduardo Piza Pellizzer ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Clinical Performance ◽  
Resin Composite ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Posterior Teeth ◽  
Composite Restorations

Longevity of direct and indirect resin composite restorations in permanent posterior teeth: A systematic review and meta-analysis

2016 ◽  
Vol 54 ◽  
pp. 1-12 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ana Maria Antonelli da Veiga ◽  
Amanda Carneiro Cunha ◽  
Daniele Masterson Tavares Pereira Ferreira ◽  
Tatiana Kelly da Silva Fidalgo ◽  
Thomaz Kauark Chianca ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Resin Composite ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Posterior Teeth ◽  
Composite Restorations

scholarly journals Clinical effectiveness of drugs in hospitalized patients with COVID-19: a systematic review and meta-analysis

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Roberto Ariel Abeldaño ◽  
Silvia Mercedes Coca ◽  
Giuliana Florencia Abeldaño ◽  
Ruth Ana María González Villoria
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Clinical Improvement ◽  
Low Income ◽  
Randomized Clinical Trials ◽  
Data Extraction ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Clinical Effectiveness ◽  
Hospitalized Patients ◽  
Low Income Countries ◽  
Qualitative Synthesis

Abstract Objective: The aim was to assess the clinical effectiveness of drugs used in hospitalized patients with COVID-19 infection.Method: We conducted a systematic review of randomized clinical trials assessing treatment with remdesivir, chloroquine, hydroxychloroquine, lopinavir, ritonavir, dexamethasone, and convalescent plasma, for hospitalized patients with a diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2 infection. The outcomes were mortality, clinical improvement, duration of ventilation, duration of oxygen support, duration of hospitalization), virological clearance, and severe adverse events.Results: A total of 48 studies were retrieved from the databases. Ten articles were finally included in the data extraction and qualitative synthesis of results. The meta-analysis suggests a benefit of dexamethasone versus standard care in the reduction of risk of mortality at day 28; and the clinical improvement at days 14 and 28 in patients treated with remdesivir.Conclusions: Dexamethasone would have a better result in hospitalized patients, especially in low-resources settings.Significance of results: The analysis of the main treatments proposed for hospitalized patients is of vital importance to reduce mortality in low-income countries; since the COVID-19 pandemic had an economic impact worldwide with the loss of jobs and economic decline in countries with scarce resources.

scholarly journals Aspirin desensitization in NSAID-exacerbated respiratory disease and its outcomes in the clinical course of asthma: A systematic review of the literature and meta-analysis

PLoS ONE ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 16 (3) ◽  
pp. e0247871
Author(s):  
Isabel Eraso ◽  
Saveria Sangiovanni ◽  
Eliana I. Morales ◽  
Liliana Fernández-Trujillo
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Lung Function ◽  
Respiratory Disease ◽  
Randomized Clinical Trials ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Previous History ◽  
Provocation Test ◽  
Clinical Effects ◽  
Aspirin Desensitization ◽  
Asthma Exacerbations

Background Nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug-exacerbated respiratory disease (NERD) might benefit from aspirin desensitization (AD) as an alternative treatment to standard care. However, there is conflicting evidence regarding its role in bronchial symptoms and asthma exacerbations. Objective To analyze the clinical effects of AD in terms of lung function, systemic and inhaled steroid use, the frequency of acute asthma exacerbations, and adverse effects in patients with NERD and asthma. Methodology We identified randomized clinical trials (RCTs) from PubMed, EMBASE, SCOPUS, and EBSCO. We also searched the RCT references for additional studies. Studies comparing AD to placebo in patients with a previous history of pulmonary symptoms triggered by ASA or other NSAIDs or with a positive provocation test to ASA were included. Primary results Five studies with 210 participants with NERD were included in this review. The study duration ranged from 3 to 6 months. Overall, the risk of bias across the included RCTs was low. We identified 3 studies evaluating lung function, 2 of which reported a significant improvement in FEV1 in the AD group after 6 months, while the other reported no difference among the treatments. Due to high heterogeneity, we did not pool the results. The remaining primary outcomes were reported only in a single study each, hindering their interpretation. Secondary outcomes revealed reduced symptom and medication scores in patients with AD. Conclusions Due to the small number of studies included in this systematic review, conclusions should be made with caution. AD shows a trend towards improving lung function (FEV1) following 6 months of treatment, although no conclusions can be made regarding the use of corticosteroids or the frequency of acute exacerbations. AD appears to reduce both symptom and medication scores. Additional RCTs are needed to fully assess the efficacy of AD in reducing bronchial symptoms in patients with NERD.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document