Recurrent caries models to assess dental restorations: A scoping review

Ghalia Y Bhadila; Bashayer H Baras; Abdulrahman A Balhaddad; Mary Ann Williams; Thomas W Oates; Michael D Weir; Hockin H K Xu

doi:10.1016/j.jdent.2023.104604

Recurrent caries models to assess dental restorations: A scoping review

J Dent. 2023 Sep:136:104604. doi: 10.1016/j.jdent.2023.104604. Epub 2023 Jul 5.

Authors

Ghalia Y Bhadila¹, Bashayer H Baras², Abdulrahman A Balhaddad³, Mary Ann Williams⁴, Thomas W Oates⁵, Michael D Weir⁵, Hockin H K Xu⁵

Affiliations

¹ Department of Pediatric Dentistry, Faculty of Dentistry, King Abdulaziz University, Jeddah 21589, Saudi Arabia. Electronic address: gbhadila@kau.edu.sa.
² Department of Restorative Dental Sciences, College of Dentistry, King Saud University, Riyadh 11451, Saudi Arabia. Electronic address: bbaras@ksu.edu.sa.
³ Department of Restorative Dental Sciences, College of Dentistry, Imam Abdulrahman bin Faisal University, P.O. Box 1982, Dammam 31441, Saudi Arabia.
⁴ Health Sciences and Human Services Library, University of Maryland, Baltimore, MD 21201, United States.
⁵ Department of Advanced Oral Sciences and Therapeutics, University of Maryland School of Dentistry, Baltimore, MD 21201, United States.

PMID: 37419382
DOI: 10.1016/j.jdent.2023.104604

Abstract

Objectives: To review the literature on recurrent caries models used to evaluate restorative materials, compare reported methodology and parameters, and devise specific recommendations to be considered in future investigations.

Data: The following were extracted: study design, sample characteristics, source of teeth, name of restorations compared including controls, recurrent caries model type, type of demineralizing and remineralizing solutions, type of biofilm used, methods to detect recurrent caries.

Sources: Literature searches were performed in OVID Medline, EMBASE, SCOPUS, and Cochrane Library.

Study selection: For a study to be included, it had to examine dental materials for tooth restoration purposes only with a valid control group and evaluate restorative dental materials regardless of the form of the teeth caries model used or nature of the tooth structure used. A total of 91 studies were included. Most of the studies presented were in vitro. Human teeth were the main source of specimens utilized. Around 88% of the studies used specimens without an artificial gap, and 44% used a chemical model. S. mutans was the main bacterial species used in microbial caries models.

Conclusion: The findings of this review provided an insight into the performance of available dental materials assessed using different recurrent caries models, yet this review cannot be used as a guideline for material selection. Selecting the appropriate restorative material relies on several patient-related factors such as microbiota, occlusion, and diet that are not comprehensively taken into consideration in recurrent caries models and thus hinder reliable comparison.

Clinical significance: Due to the heterogenicity of variables among studies on the performance of dental restorative materials, this scoping review aimed to provide insights for dental researchers concerning the available recurrent caries models, testing methods used, and aspects of comparison between these materials including their characteristics and limitations.

Keywords: Antibacterial agents; Bioactive; Composite resins; Dental materials; Nanoparticles; Recurrent caries; Tooth remineralization.

Publication types

Review
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't

MeSH terms

Composite Resins*
Dental Caries Susceptibility
Dental Caries*
Dental Restoration, Permanent / methods
Humans
Tooth, Deciduous

Substances

Composite Resins