Background. An expert panel convened by the American Dental Association Council on Scientific Affairs and the Center for Evidence-Based Dentistry conducted a systematic review and formulated evidence-based clinical recommendations for the arrest or reversal of noncavitated and cavitated dental caries using nonrestorative treatments in children and adults. Types of Studies Reviewed. The authors conducted a systematic search of the literature in MEDLINE and Embase via Ovid, Cochrane CENTRAL, and Cochrane database of systematic reviews to identify randomized controlled trials reporting on nonrestorative treatments for noncavitated and cavitated carious lesions. The authors used the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation approach to assess the certainty in the evidence and move from the evidence to the decisions. Results. The expert panel formulated 11 clinical recommendations, each specific to lesion type, tooth surface, and dentition. Of the most effective interventions, the panel provided recommendations for the use of 38% silver diamine fluoride, sealants, 5% sodium fluoride varnish, 1.23% acidulated phosphate fluoride gel, and 5,000 parts per million fluoride (1.1% sodium fluoride) toothpaste or gel, among others. The panel also provided a recommendation against the use of 10% casein phosphopeptideeamorphous calcium phosphate. Conclusions and Practical Implications. Although the recommended interventions are often used for caries prevention, or in conjunction with restorative treatment options, these approaches have shown to be effective in arresting or reversing carious lesions. Clinicians are encouraged to prioritize use of these interventions based on effectiveness, safety, and feasibility.

The goal of nonrestorative or non- and microinvasive caries treatment (fluoride- and nonfluoride-based interventions) is to manage the caries disease process at a lesion level and minimize the loss of sound tooth structure. The purpose of this systematic review and network meta-analysis was to summarize the available evidence on nonrestorative treatments for the outcomes of 1) arrest or reversal of noncavitated and cavitated carious lesions on primary and permanent teeth and 2) adverse events. We included parallel and split-mouth randomized controlled trials where patients were followed for any length of time. Studies were identified with MEDLINE and Embase via Ovid, Cochrane CENTRAL, and Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. Pairs of reviewers independently conducted the selection of studies, data extraction, risk-of-bias assessments, and assessment of the certainty in the evidence with the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) approach. Data were synthesized with a random effects model and a frequentist approach. Forty-four trials (48 reports) were eligible, which included 7,378 participants and assessed the effect of 22 interventions in arresting or reversing noncavitated or cavitated carious lesions. Four network meta-analyses suggested that sealants + 5% sodium fluoride (NaF) varnish, resin infiltration + 5% NaF varnish, and 5,000-ppm F (1.1% NaF) toothpaste or gel were the most effective for arresting or reversing noncavitated occlusal, approximal, and noncavitated and cavitated root carious lesions on primary and/or permanent teeth, respectively (low- to moderate-certainty evidence). Study-level data indicated that 5% NaF varnish was the most effective for arresting or reversing noncavitated facial/lingual carious lesions (low certainty) and that 38% silver diamine fluoride solution applied biannually was the most effective for arresting advanced cavitated carious lesions on any coronal surface (moderate to high certainty). Preventing the onset of caries is the ultimate goal of a caries management plan. However, if the disease is present, there is a variety of effective interventions to treat carious lesions nonrestoratively.

It is important to evaluate the inhibitory effect on lesion progression of CPP-ACP when delivered in a mousse vehicle, commercially known as MI Paste, and compare it to actual remineralization products already established. SUMMARYThis in-vitro study evaluated the inhibition of demineralization in enamel sections produced by MI paste, fluoride and a combination of both, compared to artificial saliva and NaF 5000 ppm in a caries progression pH-cycling model. Twenty-one teeth were demineralized to create subsurface enamel lesions (approximately 200 microns in depth). The teeth were sectioned and characterized using polarized-light-microscopy (PLM). A single section from each lesion was assigned to a treatment group: Artificial saliva, NaF 5000 ppm (Prevident, Colgate), MI paste (Recaldent, GC America Inc), NaF 1100 ppm (Crest, Procter & Gamble) and NaF 1100 ppm plus MI paste. The sec- tions were covered with varnish except for an exposed window on the external surface of the lesion and placed in a six-day pH-cycling model with two daily treatment applications of two minutes each. The sections were characterized by PLM, and the lesion areas were measured using a digital image analysis system. Based on a pairedsample t-test, significant differences (p<.05) in percentage of change in lesion size were found between the high fluoride group and all the other groups. No significant difference was found between the artificial saliva and MI paste group, neither was there any significant difference between the NaF 1100 ppm, the combined application group or the MI paste group alone. In conclusion, the higher concentration of NaF (5000 ppm) reduced lesion progression to the greatest extent. The MI paste group did not show any effect on the inhibition of lesion progression. Further studies on the preventive effect and longer treatment applications are recommended.

Maintenance of health and preservation of tooth structure through risk-based prevention and patient-centered, evidencebased disease management, reassessed at regular intervals over time, are the cornerstones of present-day caries management. Yet management of caries based on risk assessment that goes beyond restorative care has not had a strong place in curriculum development and competency assessment in U.S. dental schools. The aim of this study was to develop a competency-based core cariology curriculum framework for use in U.S. dental schools. The Section on Cariology of the American Dental Education Association (ADEA) organized a one-day consensus workshop, followed by a meeting program, to adapt the European Core Cariology Curriculum to the needs of U.S. dental education. Participants in the workshop were 73 faculty members from 35 U.S., three Canadian, and four international dental schools. Representatives from all 65 U.S. dental schools were then invited to review and provide feedback on a draft document. A recommended competency statement on caries management was also developed: "Upon graduation, a dentist must be competent in evidence-based detection, diagnosis, risk assessment, prevention, and nonsurgical and surgical management of dental caries, both at the individual and community levels, and be able to reassess the outcomes of interventions over time." This competency statement supports a curriculum framework built around five domains: 1) knowledge base; 2) risk assessment, diagnosis, and synthesis; 3) treatment decision making: preventive strategies and nonsurgical management; 4) treatment decision making: surgical therapy; and 5) evidence-based cariology in clinical and public health practice. Each domain includes objectives and learning outcomes.

No abstract