| REVIEW ARTICLE |
|
| Year : 2022 | Volume
: 14
| Issue : 1 | Page : 71-79 |
|
|
Nonfluoride remineralizing agent for caries prevention in children: A systematic review and meta-analysis
Sowndarya Gunasekaran1, Soundarya Sakthivel2, Pazhayidath Isaac Nainan3, BM Shanthala4
1 Department of Pediatric and Preventive Dentistry, Vinayaka Mission's Sankarachariyar Dental College, Vinayaka Mission's Research Foundation (Deemed to be University), Salem, India
2 Department of Oral Medicine and Radiology, AB Shetty Memorial Institute of Dental Sciences, Nitte (Deemed to be University), Mangalore, Karnataka, India
3 Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, RVS Dental College and Hospital, Coimbatore, Tamil Nadu, India
4 Department of Paediatrics and Preventive Dentistry, Coorg Institute of Dental Sciences, Kodagu, Karnataka, India
Correspondence Address:
Sowndarya Gunasekaran
Vinayaka Mission's Sankarachariyar Dental College, Vinayaka Mission's Research Foundation (Deemed to be University), NH 47 Sankari Main Road, Ariyanoor, Salem - 636 308, Tamil Nadu
India
 Source of Support: None, Conflict of Interest: None  | Check |
DOI: 10.4103/jorr.jorr_41_20
|
|
|
Background: The recent outburst of nonfluoride remineralizing agents suggests that it may serve as alternative and as an adjunct for fluoride in preventing, arresting, or even reversing dental caries. Aim: This study aims to assess the caries prevention potential of a variety of nonfluoride agents in children, with an efficient and extended literature database search. Materials and Methods: Electronic (MEDLINE, PubMed, and The Cochrane Library) and manual searches were conducted for relevant studies published till March 2020. Randomized control trials (RCTs) that investigated the effect of nonfluoride remineralizing agents such as casein phosphopeptide-amorphous calcium phosphate (ACP), ACP, arginine, probiotic, xylitol, chlorhexidine, and nanoparticles in remineralization and prevention of dental caries were assessed. Results: Twelve studies met the criteria. There were 2653 patients in the test group and 2596 in the control group. Participants using nonfluoride agents were more likely to experience a reduction in dental caries compared to control ([standardized mean difference {SMD}] −0.55 [−1.06, 0.04], 95% confidence interval [CI], I2 = 98%), but there was substantial heterogeneity (98%) across studies. Moreover, an overall statistically insignificant benefit of Non-fluoride agent was detected (SMD −0.55 [−1.06, 0.04], 95% CI, I2 = 98% P < 0.00001). Conclusion: High-quality RCTs on the preventive effect of nonfluoride agents in children are still important to make a conclusive recommendation.
|
|
|
|
| [FULL TEXT] [PDF]* |
|
 |
|
