Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39780151›Full record

SynthesisBMC oral health2025

Microinvasive interventions in the management of proximal caries lesions in primary and permanent teeth- systematic review and meta-analysis.

Robina Tasleem, Saleh Ali Alqahtani, Naif Abogazalah, Hussain Almubarak, Ammara Riaz, Sarosh Sher Ali, Zeeshan Allana

Abstract readSystematic ReviewMeta-Analysis
In one paragraph

Synthesis in BMC oral health, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
–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

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
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.

Robina TasleemDepartment of Prosthodontics, King Khalid University, College of Dentistry, Abha, Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. robinatdr@gmail.com.ORCID 0000-0002-9087-1453
Saleh Ali AlqahtaniDepartment of Restorative Dental Sciences, King Khalid University, College of Dentistry, Abha, Kingdom of Saudi Arabia.ORCID 0000-0002-4017-1694
Naif AbogazalahDepartment of Restorative Dental Sciences, King Khalid University, College of Dentistry, Abha, Kingdom of Saudi Arabia.ORCID 0000-0003-3343-9397
Hussain AlmubarakDepartment of Diagnostic Sciences & Oral Biology, King Khalid University, College of Dentistry, Abha, Kingdom of Saudi Arabia.
Ammara RiazSharif Medial and Dental College, Lahore, Pakistan.
Sarosh Sher AliAgha Khan University, Karachi, Pakistan.
Zeeshan AllanaAgha Khan University, Karachi, Pakistan.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundDental caries is one of the most common non-communicable diseases in humans. Various interventions are available for the management, of which microinvasive techniques such as infiltration, sealants, glass ionomers, are novel and convenient. The purpose of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to compare microinvasive techniques with noninvasive or invasive treatment modalities in terms of effectiveness in halting interproximal caries lesion progression radiographically assessed. METHODOLOGY: The review was registered on PROSPERO (CRD42024557636). Three electronic databases, PubMed, Google Scholar and Cochrane Oral Health Group Trial Register, were searched for the randomized controlled trials comparing any of the microinvasive techniques with either non- invasive or invasive treatments for non-cavitated proximal lesions both in primary and permanent teeth. The radiographic lesion progression was set as primary outcome. Rayyan and EndNote X9 were used for screening and full text review respectively. The risk of bias was assessed using Cochrane Risk of Bias tool. We performed analysis with the help of RevMan5.4 and calculated odds ratio and 95% confidence interval for evaluation of efficacy. The quality of evidence was assessed with the help of GRADEpro.

resultsA total of 185 studies were recruited after initial search, of which 18 were recruited after screening. Finally, 13 studies were included, and all were split mouth randomized controlled trials comparing various microinvasive techniques with non-invasive techniques. Five of the included trials studied primary teeth in children ranging from 3 to 9 years and seven trials assessed permanent teeth in children and adults ranging from 11 to 45 years while one trial included children having lesions on both primary and permanent teeth. The risk of bias assessment showed that 2 of the included studies had unclear risk of bias whereas 11 were at low risk of bias. Tau

conclusionThis review concludes that microinvasive techniques are superior to noninvasive interventions for the treatment of non-cavitated proximal lesions in both primary and permanent dentition. However, cost effectiveness, feasibility, durability, and long-term effects of microinvasive techniques need to be explored further.

Indexed as

Dental CariesDentition, PermanentTooth, DeciduousHumansRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicDental cariesHome care dental devicesMeta-analysisPit and fissure sealantsSynthetic resinsSystematic review

Identifiers

PMID39780151
PMCPMC11716243

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.