English
Albanian
Arabic
Armenian
Azerbaijani
Belarusian
Bengali
Bosnian
Catalan
Czech
Danish
Deutsch
Dutch
English
Estonian
Finnish
Français
Greek
Haitian Creole
Hebrew
Hindi
Hungarian
Icelandic
Indonesian
Irish
Italian
Japanese
Korean
Latvian
Lithuanian
Macedonian
Mongolian
Norwegian
Persian
Polish
Portuguese
Romanian
Russian
Serbian
Slovak
Slovenian
Spanish
Swahili
Swedish
Turkish
Ukrainian
Vietnamese
Български
中文(简体)
中文(繁體)
Journal of Dentistry 2015-Nov

Antibacterial effects of cavity lining: a systematic review and network meta-analysis.

Only registered users can translate articles
Log In/Sign up
The link is saved to the clipboard
Falk Schwendicke
Yu-Kang Tu
Le-Yin Hsu
Gerd Göstemeyer

Keywords

Abstract

OBJECTIVE

Cavity liners are frequently used prior placing a restoration, with one main aim being to reduce the number of remaining bacteria. We systematically appraised studies comparing antibacterial effects of different liners against each other or no liner.

UNASSIGNED

reporting the number of sterile cavities before/after lining or sealing, or the reduction in bacterial numbers (colony-forming-units) in two or more treatment groups were included. Treatments were categorized as: no/placebo liner, calcium hydroxide, mineral trioxide aggregate, antibiotic/disinfectant, calcium phosphates, zinc oxide eugenol, black copper cement, and glass ionomer cement liners. Pairwise and network meta-analyses were performed.

METHODS

From 113 identified studies, 14 (500 treated lesions) were included. Risk of bias was high or unclear. Based on 11 studies, network meta-analysis found mineral trioxide lining to yield the greatest probability of achieving sterile cavities after a lining/sealing period (73%), followed by antibiotic/disinfectant (8%) and zinc oxide eugenol (7%). Only six studies assessed bacterial reduction after lining/sealing, and zinc oxide eugenol was found to have the highest probability of achieving a bacterial reduction. In both analyses, not providing any lining was found to have low antibacterial effects.

CONCLUSIONS

Within the limitations of this review and the included studies, certain liners seem more suitable to achieve sterile cavities or reduce bacterial numbers than others. Given the paucity of data and the unclear impact of remaining bacteria on clinical outcomes, further recommendations for specific cavity treatments prior a restoration are not possible.

CONCLUSIONS

There is insufficient evidence to generally recommend cavity lining or the use of any specific liner based on their antibacterial effects. Dentists might continue to use liners, but should be aware that such use is not strongly supported by clinical studies.

Join our facebook page

The most complete medicinal herbs database backed by science

  • Works in 55 languages
  • Herbal cures backed by science
  • Herbs recognition by image
  • Interactive GPS map - tag herbs on location (coming soon)
  • Read scientific publications related to your search
  • Search medicinal herbs by their effects
  • Organize your interests and stay up do date with the news research, clinical trials and patents

Type a symptom or a disease and read about herbs that might help, type a herb and see diseases and symptoms it is used against.
*All information is based on published scientific research

Google Play badgeApp Store badge