Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30232622›Full record

SynthesisClinical oral investigations2018

Survival percentages of atraumatic restorative treatment (ART) restorations and sealants in posterior teeth: an updated systematic review and meta-analysis.

R G de Amorim, J E Frencken, D P Raggio, X Chen, X Hu, S C Leal

Abstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Clinical oral investigations, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 42 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
42citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
18.8field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

42 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 146 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Minimal intervention dentistry for managing carious lesions into dentine in primary teeth: an umbrella review.European archives of paediatric dentistry : official journal of the European Academy of Paediatric Dentistry · 2022
    Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Trial
  8. Trial
  9. Trial
  10. Trial
  11. Trial
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. TiOOdontology · 2023
    Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors at 5 institutions in 5 countries.

R G de Amorim, Brasília, Brazil. rga1612@yahoo.com.br.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-6025-6700
J E FrenckenDepartment of Oral Function and Prosthetic Dentistry, Radboud University Medical Centre, Nijmegen, The Netherlands.
D P RaggioOrthodontics and Pediatric Dentistry Department, School of Dentistry, University of São Paulo, São Paulo, Brazil.
X ChenState Key Laboratory Breeding Base of Basic Science of Stomatology (Hubei-MOST) & Key Laboratory of Oral Biomedicine Ministry of Education, School and Hospital of Stomatology, Wuhan University, Wuhan, China.
X HuState Key Laboratory Breeding Base of Basic Science of Stomatology (Hubei-MOST) & Key Laboratory of Oral Biomedicine Ministry of Education, School and Hospital of Stomatology, Wuhan University, Wuhan, China.
S C LealDepartment of Dentistry, Faculty of Health Sciences, University of Brasília, Brasília, Brazil.
Wuhan University · CNRadboud University Nijmegen · NLUniversidade de Brasília · BRUniversidade de São Paulo · BRYahoo (United Kingdom) · GB

Funding

Conselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e Tecnológico 306852/2016-0Conselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e Tecnológico 309521/2015-7
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveThe aim of the present study is to update the results of two previous meta-analyses, published in 2006 and 2012, on the survival percentages of atraumatic restorative treatment (ART) restorations and ART sealants. The current meta-analysis includes Chinese publications not investigated before. MATERIALS AND

methodsUntil February 2017, six databases were interrogated (two English, one Portuguese, one Spanish and two Chinese). Using six exclusion criteria, a group of six independent reviewers selected 43 publications from a total of 1958 potentially relevant studies retrieved. Confidence intervals and/or standard errors were calculated and the heterogeneity variance of the survival rates was estimated.

resultsThe survival percentages and standard errors of single-surface and multiple-surface ART restorations in primary posterior teeth over the first 2 years were 94.3% (± 1.5) and 65.4% (± 3.9), respectively; for single-surface ART restorations in permanent posterior teeth over the first 3 years, they were 87.1% (± 3.2); and for multiple-surface ART restorations in permanent posterior teeth over the first 5 years, they were 77% (± 9.0). The mean annual dentine-carious-lesion-failure percentages in previously sealed pits and fissures using ART sealants in permanent posterior teeth over the first 3 and 5 years were 0.9 and 1.9%, respectively.

conclusionsART single-surface restorations presented high survival percentages in both primary and permanent posterior teeth, whilst ART multiple-surface restorations presented lower survival percentages. ART sealants presented a high-caries-preventive effect. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: ART is an effective evidence-based option for treating and preventing carious lesions in primary and permanent posterior teeth.

Indexed as

Dental Atraumatic Restorative TreatmentBicuspidDental CariesDental Restoration FailureHumansMolarPit and Fissure SealantsPit and Fissure SealantsAtraumatic restorative treatmentMeta-analysisRestorationSealantSurvivalSystematic review

Identifiers

PMID30232622
OpenAlexW2891661736

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.