Efficiency of different storage media for avulsed teeth in animal models: a systematic review

Background/Aims: Evidence mapping of systematic reviews (SRs) systematically and comprehensively identifies, organizes, and summarizes the distribution of scientific evidence in a field. The aims of this study were to delineate domains in dental traumatology (DT), evaluate the existing SRs within the domains, and identify the paucity of evidence for future research. Methods: Domains and sub-domains of DT were established according to the methods of qualitative research. The protocol for evidence mapping was prepared as per the guidelines of GEM and PRISMA. The search strategy was formulated using words and MeSH terms in eight databases without restriction of languages and year of publication. Gray literature, protocol registries, and references of selected articles were also searched. Duplicates were removed, and the final selection of SRs was completed. Data extraction and quality analysis using the ROBIS tool and the PRISMA checklist were performed. Results: The overall search resulted in 64 SRs from 1999 to 2020 with 44 published in last six years. The highest number of SRs had been performed in the Prognostic domain (n = 19) followed by the domains of Epidemiology (n = 15), Therapeutics (n = 10), Oral Biology (n = 7), Diagnostics (n = 6), Preventive (n = 5), and Research Methods (n = 2). Within each domain, there were variabilities in the number of reviewers, a priori protocols, search limitations, risk of bias methods, and meta-analysis. Of the SRs, including 4 Cochrane reviews, 28.4% were inconclusive. A low risk of bias was found in 48.4% of the SRs. Among the registered and ongoing SRs, six were from the domain of epidemiology, two in the domain of therapeutics, five from prognostics, and one each in the domains of prevention and research methods. Conclusion: The SRs in DT could be mapped in seven domains with variabilities in the methods. The majority had an a priori registered protocol and a low risk of reporting errors. Within the Epidemiology and Preventive domains, SRs were present in all the sub-domains with the majority demonstrating low-risk of bias (ROB). The domain of prognosis had SRs in most sub-domains but with a high ROB. Insufficient numbers

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Evidence mapping and quality assessment of systematic reviews in dental traumatology

Tewari

Mathur

Kaur

et al. 2020

“…Further, Fagundes et al 23 highlighted, based on meta‐analyses, that storage in HBSS was associated with a higher level of viable PDL cells in comparison with tap water and saline solutions. Finally, one systematic review solely dealing with the replantation of avulsed teeth in animals was unable to draw any conclusion regarding the effectiveness of the included storage media due to substantial heterogeneity and limitations in study design 61 …”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Storage of an avulsed tooth prior to replantation: A systematic review and meta‐analysis

Brier

Dorien

Borra³

et al. 2020

Background/Aim It is crucial to store an avulsed tooth appropriately to preserve the viability of the periodontal ligament cells prior to replantation. The aim of this systematic review was to identify the best available evidence for the effectiveness of any technique available to laypeople for storing an avulsed tooth compared with storage in milk or saliva. Methods The following databases were searched (September 2019): Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, and Embase. Two reviewers independently considered trial eligibility, then extracted and analyzed data, and assessed the risk of bias. The certainty of the body of evidence was appraised according to the GRADE methodology. Results Out of 4118 references, 33 studies were included and reported 23 comparisons of which 10 were synthesized in a meta‐analysis. The limited evidence available favors storing an avulsed tooth in Hank's balanced salt solution (pooled SMD 2.47, 95% CI [1.59;3.34], P < .00001), propolis solution (pooled SMD 1.73, 95% CI [1.12;2.33], P < .00001), oral rehydration salts (pooled SMD 4.16, 95% CI [2.10;6.23], P < .0001), rice water, and cling film compared with storage in milk. The cell viability rate was significantly lower in teeth stored in saline solutions (pooled SMD −4.35, 95% CI [−7.55;−1.14], P = .008), tap water, buttermilk, castor oil, GC Tooth Mousse, and turmeric extract than those stored in milk. There is insufficient evidence to recommend for or against temporary storage of an avulsed tooth in saliva compared with alternative solutions. The certainty of evidence was considered low to very low due to limitations in study design, indirect study populations and outcome measures, and imprecision. Conclusion Although milk was shown to extend the periodontal ligament cell viability before replantation compared with saline or tap water, the following media have also demonstrated efficacy at preserving the cell viability: Hank's balanced salt solution, propolis, oral rehydration salts, rice water, and cling film.

“…The challenge in dental traumatology is to find the most suitable storage media for avulsed tooth. Researchers have used different models to address this issue, such as animal models (dog, monkey, cat, rat, and mouse) and human models (healthy PDLs from extracted teeth). Human studies are based on two approaches.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Evaluation of periodontal ligament cell viability in different storage media based on human PDL cell culture experiments—A systematic review

Osmanovic

Halilovic

Kurtovic-Kozaric

et al. 2018