Validity of sealant retention as surrogate for caries prevention--a systematic review.

<h4>Introduction/aim</h4>To appraise the clinical literature in determining whether loss of complete sealant retention as surrogate endpoint is directly associated with caries occurrence on sealed teeth as its clinical endpoint and to apply the appraised evidence in testing the null-hypo...

Descripción completa

Guardado en:

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales:	Steffen Mickenautsch, Veerasamy Yengopal
Formato:	article
Lenguaje:	EN
Publicado:	Public Library of Science (PLoS) 2013
Materias:	Medicine R Science Q
Acceso en línea:	https://doaj.org/article/66c964d43ca94c99b363514dafd6bb08
Etiquetas:	Agregar Etiqueta Sin Etiquetas, Sea el primero en etiquetar este registro!

id	oai:doaj.org-article:66c964d43ca94c99b363514dafd6bb08
record_format	dspace
spelling	oai:doaj.org-article:66c964d43ca94c99b363514dafd6bb082021-11-18T08:49:50ZValidity of sealant retention as surrogate for caries prevention--a systematic review.1932-620310.1371/journal.pone.0077103https://doaj.org/article/66c964d43ca94c99b363514dafd6bb082013-01-01T00:00:00Zhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/pmid/24194861/pdf/?tool=EBIhttps://doaj.org/toc/1932-6203<h4>Introduction/aim</h4>To appraise the clinical literature in determining whether loss of complete sealant retention as surrogate endpoint is directly associated with caries occurrence on sealed teeth as its clinical endpoint and to apply the appraised evidence in testing the null-hypothesis that the retention/caries ratio between different types of sealant materials (resin and glass-ionomer cement) is not statistically significant (= Prentice criterion for surrogate endpoint validity).<h4>Methods</h4>Databases searched PubMed/Medline, Directory of Open Access Journals; IndMed, Scielo. Systematic reviews were checked for suitable trials. The search terms: "fiss* AND seal*" and "fissure AND sealant" were used. Article selection criteria were: clinical trial reporting on the retention and caries occurrence of resin and/or glass-ionomer cement (GIC) fissure sealed permanent molar teeth; minimum 24-month follow-up period; systematic review or meta-analysis. Datasets and information were extracted from accepted trials. The principle outcome measure was the ratio of Risk of loss of complete retention to the Risk of caries occurrence per sealant type (RCR). Risk of bias was assessed in trials and sensitivity analysis with regard to potential confounding factors conducted. The null-hypothesis was tested by graphical and statistical methods.<h4>Results</h4>The risk of loss of complete retention of sealant materials was associated with the risk of caries occurrence for resin but not for GIC based sealants. The difference between RCR values of the two sealant types was statistically significant (p<0.05). The null-hypothesis was rejected.<h4>Conclusions</h4>The current clinical evidence suggests that complete retention of pit and fissure sealants may not be a valid surrogate endpoint for caries prevention as its clinical endpoint. Further research is required to corroborate the current results.Steffen MickenautschVeerasamy YengopalPublic Library of Science (PLoS)articleMedicineRScienceQENPLoS ONE, Vol 8, Iss 10, p e77103 (2013)
institution	DOAJ
collection	DOAJ
language	EN
topic	Medicine R Science Q
spellingShingle	Medicine R Science Q Steffen Mickenautsch Veerasamy Yengopal Validity of sealant retention as surrogate for caries prevention--a systematic review.
description	<h4>Introduction/aim</h4>To appraise the clinical literature in determining whether loss of complete sealant retention as surrogate endpoint is directly associated with caries occurrence on sealed teeth as its clinical endpoint and to apply the appraised evidence in testing the null-hypothesis that the retention/caries ratio between different types of sealant materials (resin and glass-ionomer cement) is not statistically significant (= Prentice criterion for surrogate endpoint validity).<h4>Methods</h4>Databases searched PubMed/Medline, Directory of Open Access Journals; IndMed, Scielo. Systematic reviews were checked for suitable trials. The search terms: "fiss* AND seal*" and "fissure AND sealant" were used. Article selection criteria were: clinical trial reporting on the retention and caries occurrence of resin and/or glass-ionomer cement (GIC) fissure sealed permanent molar teeth; minimum 24-month follow-up period; systematic review or meta-analysis. Datasets and information were extracted from accepted trials. The principle outcome measure was the ratio of Risk of loss of complete retention to the Risk of caries occurrence per sealant type (RCR). Risk of bias was assessed in trials and sensitivity analysis with regard to potential confounding factors conducted. The null-hypothesis was tested by graphical and statistical methods.<h4>Results</h4>The risk of loss of complete retention of sealant materials was associated with the risk of caries occurrence for resin but not for GIC based sealants. The difference between RCR values of the two sealant types was statistically significant (p<0.05). The null-hypothesis was rejected.<h4>Conclusions</h4>The current clinical evidence suggests that complete retention of pit and fissure sealants may not be a valid surrogate endpoint for caries prevention as its clinical endpoint. Further research is required to corroborate the current results.
format	article
author	Steffen Mickenautsch Veerasamy Yengopal
author_facet	Steffen Mickenautsch Veerasamy Yengopal
author_sort	Steffen Mickenautsch
title	Validity of sealant retention as surrogate for caries prevention--a systematic review.
title_short	Validity of sealant retention as surrogate for caries prevention--a systematic review.
title_full	Validity of sealant retention as surrogate for caries prevention--a systematic review.
title_fullStr	Validity of sealant retention as surrogate for caries prevention--a systematic review.
title_full_unstemmed	Validity of sealant retention as surrogate for caries prevention--a systematic review.
title_sort	validity of sealant retention as surrogate for caries prevention--a systematic review.
publisher	Public Library of Science (PLoS)
publishDate	2013
url	https://doaj.org/article/66c964d43ca94c99b363514dafd6bb08
work_keys_str_mv	AT steffenmickenautsch validityofsealantretentionassurrogateforcariespreventionasystematicreview AT veerasamyyengopal validityofsealantretentionassurrogateforcariespreventionasystematicreview
_version_	1718421266014142464

Validity of sealant retention as surrogate for caries prevention--a systematic review.

Ejemplares similares