Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32300980›Full record

ReviewClinical oral investigations2020

Secondary caries: what is it, and how it can be controlled, detected, and managed?

Haitham Askar, Joachim Krois, Gerd Göstemeyer, Peter Bottenberg, Domenick Zero, Avijit Banerjee, Falk Schwendicke

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Clinical oral investigations, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 89 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
89citing papers in PubMed, 4 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

89 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Observational
  14. Review
  15. Review
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. Article

29 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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

7 authors.

Haitham AskarDepartment of Operative and Preventive Dentistry, Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Aßmannshauser Str. 4-6, 14197, Berlin, Germany.
Joachim KroisDepartment of Operative and Preventive Dentistry, Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Aßmannshauser Str. 4-6, 14197, Berlin, Germany.
Gerd GöstemeyerDepartment of Operative and Preventive Dentistry, Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Aßmannshauser Str. 4-6, 14197, Berlin, Germany.
Peter BottenbergOral Health Sciences, Vrije Universiteit Brussel, Brussels, Belgium.
Domenick ZeroDepartment of Cariology, Operative Dentistry and Dental Public Health, Indiana University, School of Dentistry, Indianapolis, IN, USA.
Avijit BanerjeeConservative & MI Dentistry, Faculty of Dentistry, Oral & Craniofacial Sciences, King's College London, London, UK.
Falk SchwendickeDepartment of Operative and Preventive Dentistry, Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Aßmannshauser Str. 4-6, 14197, Berlin, Germany. falk.schwendicke@charite.de.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesTo assess how to control, detect, and treat secondary caries. This review serves to inform a joint ORCA/EFCD consensus process.

methodsSystematic and non-systematic reviews were performed or consulted and narratively synthesized.

resultsSecondary (or recurrent) caries is defined as a lesion associated with restorations or sealants. While the restorative material itself has some influence on secondary caries, further factors like the presence and size of restoration gaps, patients' caries risk, and the placing dentist's experience seem more relevant. Current detection methods for secondary caries are only sparsely validated and likely prone for the risk of over-detection. In many patients, it might be prudent to prioritize specific detection methods to avoid invasive overtreatment. Detected secondary caries can be managed either by repair of the defective part of the restoration or its complete replacement.

conclusionsThere is sparse data towards the nature of secondary caries and how to control, detect, and treat it. CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE: Despite often claimed to be a major complication of restorations, there is surprisingly little data on secondary caries. Longer-term studies may be needed to identify differences in secondary caries risk between materials and to identify characteristic features of progressive lesions (i.e., those in need of treatment).

Indexed as

Dental Restoration, PermanentDental CariesDental MaterialsHumansDental MaterialsDetectionEvidence-based medicineRestorationsSecondary cariesSystematic review

Identifiers

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.