MIH and Dental Caries in Children: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

(1) Background: Molar-incisor hypomineralization (MIH) is a clinical condition affecting permanent teeth in children, with a documented rising trend in the last two decades. The aim of the present study was to analyze and synthesize the available evidence on caries experience (dmft/DMFT) and MIH in children. (2) Methods: A systematic review and meta-analysis were conducted according to the PRISMA statement. (3) Results: 59 papers published between 2007 and 2022 were included in the qualitative synthesis and 18 in the meta-analysis. The total sample of subjects was 17,717 (mean: 896), of which 2378 (13.4%) had MIH (mean: 119), with a girl/boy ratio of 1:1. The mean age of the enrolled participants was 8.6 (age range 7-10 years). Meta-analysis showed that MIH has a positive correlation with both dmft (effect size of 0.67, 95% CI [0.15, 1.19]) and DMFT (effect size of 0.56, 95% CI [0.41, 0.72]); (4) Conclusions: Children with MIH should be diagnosed correctly and on time. Treatment and management options for moderate and severe forms of MIH should consider prognosis based on known risk factors, and secondary and tertiary prevention policies should also consider the multifactorial nature of caries etiology.

Long-Term Effectiveness of Treating Dentin Hypersensitivity with Bifluorid 10 and Futurabond U: A Split-Mouth Randomized Double-Blind Clinical Trial

Background: The definition of dental hypersensitivity is “pain derived from exposed dentin in response to chemical, thermal tactile or osmotic stimuli which cannot be explained as arising from any other dental defect or disease”. One of the treatments proposed is tubular occlusion. The aim of this in vivo split-mouth randomized clinical trial was to evaluate the clinical efficacy of a in-office application of a fluoride varnish (Bifluorid 10) and a bonding resin (Futurabond U) in adults with dentin hypersensitivity. Material and methods: A total of 180 teeth were treated with Bifluorid 10 and 160 with Futurabond U. Outcome measurements were taken one or two weeks before treatment, at baseline at the application days, at 1 week and at 1–6 months after first treatment. Results: Both treatments reduced pain intensity. Bifluorid 10 and Futurabond U have similar efficacy in reducing SCHIFF-measured pain reduction, while Bifluorid 10 is significantly more efficient for VAS-measured pain reduction, mainly due to long-term pain reduction. Patient age has a significant negative influence on pain reduction, while the influence of patient gender and BEWE of the tooth is insignificant. Conclusions: Bifluorid 10 and Futurabond U are effective in the treatment of dental hypersensitivity. The RCT was registered at the US National Institutes of Health (ClinicalTrials.gov) #NCT04813848.

Impact of Green Tea (Camellia Sinensis) on periodontitis and caries. Systematic review and meta-analysis

Background

The oral health-promoting effects of green tea are attributed to its polyphenol components. Aim of this work was to systematically review the literature in search for clinical trials assessing green tea for managing periodontitis and caries.

Methods

Randomized clinical trials comparing the efficacy of green tea versus control groups in oral hygiene and gingival health; periodontitis; caries; periodontal pathogens number; Streptococcus mutans, Lactobacillus spp. Meta-analysis and meta-regression analysis were performed.

Literature searches were carried out using MedLine (PubMed), Scopus, and the Cochrane Library. Eighteen studies (870 subjects) were included.

Results

Green tea treatment had medium positive effect size in reducing GI (SMD: 0.50; 95%CI: −0.02/1.01); PI (SMD: 0.54; 95%CI: 0.14/0.95); GBI (SMD: 0.58; 95%CI: −0.41/1.56) and BOP (SMD: 0.52; 95%CI: −0.57/1.60) in respect to the control group. Splitting to subgroups, green tea showed a small negative effect in the chlorhexidine control groups. Green tea treatment had medium positive effect size in reducing CAL (SMD 0.58; 95%CI: −0.49/1.65) and large positive effect size in reducing PPD (SMD:1.02; 95%CI: 0.45/1.59).

Conclusion

Even if the results are encouraging, there is insufficient evidence to recommend the use of green tea formulation as first choice treatment for gingivitis, periodontitis and caries.