SynthesisClinical oral investigations2024
ART with or without the aid of chemo-mechanical agents: a systematic review.
Synthesis in Clinical oral investigations, 2024. 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.
- Histological Evaluation of Chemo Mechanical Caries Removal with a Babaco-Based Formulation Gel.Gels (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectivesTo investigate whether the use of chemo-mechanical carious tissue removal (CMCTR) agents is effective for Atraumatic Restorative Treatment (ART). MATERIALS AND
methodsSearches were conducted in 6 databases for inclusion of clinical studies. Risk of bias was assessed (RoB 2 and ROBINS-I), a meta-analysis was performed with data from time of carious tissue removal (TCTR), and the certainty of evidence was estimated. ART + CMCTR was compared to ART for the treatment of caries lesions in primary teeth (pt) and permanent teeth (PT) of humans, considering acceptability, pain/discomfort, survival and success of restorations (SSR), Oral Health-Related Quality of life (OHRQol), satisfaction, TCTR, total treatment time (TTT), carious tissue removal efficacy and adverse effects.
resultsOf 12 included studies, 4 showed low risk of bias, considering pain, TTT and TCTR outcomes. ART + CMCTR was similar or more accepted than ART for pt, causing similar or less pain/discomfort for both dentitions. There was no difference in SSR, OHRQol for PT, and adverse effects (pt), although greater satisfaction was reported after ART + CMCTR in case of PT. ART + CMCTR was better or as effective as ART in removing carious tissue (pt). TTT for pt was divergent between the groups, but without difference of TCTR for both, pt and PT (MD 0.11 [-1.56, 1.77] p = 0.90, I
conclusionsIn general, ART + CMCTR is effective, providing greater satisfaction, with no difference in SSR, OHRQol and adverse effects compared to ART, which did not present advantages in relation to pain/discomfort and efficacy in removing carious tissue. The TTT was influenced by the CMCTR agent; however, there was no difference for TCTR in the overall quantitative synthesis with Papacárie DuoGel CLINICAL RELEVANCE: The use of chemo-mechanical agents for carious tissue removal in the ART may benefit patients with reduced pain/discomfort.
Indexed as
Identifiers
39382720What 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.