ArticleEvidence-based dentistry2010
The best treatment for avulsed permanent teeth.
Article in Evidence-based dentistry, 2010. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Bis-enoxacin inhibits bone resorption and orthodontic tooth movement.Journal of dental research · 2013Article
Corrections and comments
- Comment on
Authors and funding
1 author at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
data sourcesThe Cochrane Oral Health Group's Trials Register, Cochrane CENTRAL, Medline and Embase were consulted, along with the websites www.clinicaltrials.gov and www.controlled-trials.com and reference lists of identified articles. There were no language restrictions. STUDY SELECTION: Only randomised controlled trials that included a minimum followup period of 12 months for interventions dealing with avulsed and replanted permanent teeth were considered. DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS: Two review authors independently extracted data and assessed trial quality and the risk of bias in studies to be included.
resultsThree studies (involving, in total, 162 patients and 231 teeth) were included. Study one (high risk of bias) investigated the effect of extra-oral endodontics. This showed no significant difference in radiographic resorption compared with intra-oral endodontics provided at week 1 for teeth avulsed for longer than 60 min dry time. Study two (moderate risk of bias) investigated a 10-min soaking in thymosin alpha 1 prior to replantation and then its further use as a daily gingival injection for the first 7 days. They reported a strong benefit at 48 months (14% with periodontal healing in the control group versus 77% for the experimental group). Study three (high risk of bias) investigated a 20-min soaking with gentamycin sulphate for both groups prior to replantation and then the use of hyperbaric oxygen daily in the experimental group for 80 min for the first 10 days. They reported a strong benefit at 12 months (43% periodontal healing versus 88% for the experimental group). There was no formal reporting of adverse events.
conclusionsThe available evidence suggests that extra-oral endodontic treatment is not detrimental for teeth replanted after more than 60 min dry time. Studies with moderate/ high risk of bias indicate that soaking in thymosin alpha 1 and gentamycin sulphate followed by hyperbaric oxygen may be advantageous but these strategies have not previously been reported as interventions for avulsed teeth and await further validation. More evidence with low risk of bias is required and, with the low incidence of avulsed teeth, collaborative multicentre trials are indicated.
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.