Titanium tetrafluoride and dental caries: a systematic review

Abstract

The aim of this systematic review was to evaluate the effectiveness of titanium tetrafluoride as a preventive or cariostatic agent against caries. The databases used to find the articles analyzed were MEDLINE LILACS, and BBO. In MEDLINE and LILACS the search strategy utilized was "titanium" [Words] and "tetrafluoride" [Words] and Spanish or English or Portuguese [Language], whereas In BBO "titânio" [Words] and "tetrafluoreto" [Words] and Espanhol or Inglês or Português [Language]. Out of a total of 42 studies found, which assessed possible preventive/cariostatic effects of titanium tetrafluoride against caries in vivo, only 2 were selected. In both studies, titanium tetrafluoride was shown to be effective against caries. However, given that the quality and consequently the validity of these two clinical studies are questionable, their results do not allow to conclude that titanium tetrafluoride is effective against caries clinically.

Role of titanium tetrafluoride (TiF4) in conservative dentistry: A systematic review

“…[47] have tested and proven the invalidity of two clinical studies dealing with the preventive and cariostatic potential of TiF 4 . With regard to sample size and method of selection, the studies conducted by Buyukyilmaz et al .…”

Nanoleakage Inhibition Within Hybrid Layer Using New Protective Chemicals and Their Effect on Adhesion

“…Low pH (approximately 1.2) of TiF 4 favors the linking between titanium and oxygen of the phosphate group and leads to the formation of a titanium dioxide glaze-like layer on the surface (Alves et al, 2005). The reason for the decreased µTBS for TiF 4 and TiF 4 + CAPE groups in our study, especially for Bis-GMA and 4-META/MMA cements, might have resulted from this glaze-like layer formation on the prepared and treated dentin.…”

An AMSTAR assessment of the methodological quality of systematic reviews of oral healthcare interventions published in the Journal of Applied Oral Science (JAOS)

“…Five systematic reviews were identified, one of which was subsequently excluded 16 as it was a review of a diagnostic test. Four systematic reviews (Figure 1) were included and provided data for this study 1,4,5,11 . The individual assessments for these reviews are presented in (Figure 2).…”

“…Alves, et al 1 (2005): Summary Score (1/11)Mickenautsch, et al 11 (2007): Summary Score (5/11)Estrela, et al 4 (2008): Summary Score (2/11)Estrela, et al 5 (2009): Summary Score (4/11) Empty Review…”