Systemic benefits of periodontal therapy in patients with obesity and periodontitis: a systematic review.

This systematic review aimed to answer the focused question: "What are the benefits of subgingival periodontal therapy on blood hematological and biochemical index, biomarkers of inflammation and oxidative stress, quality of life, and periodontal pathogen counts in patients with obesity and periodontitis?". A systematic literature search was performed in six databases: PubMed, Embase, LILACS, Web of Science, Cochrane and SCOPUS and other sources, and a manual search was conducted as well. Inclusion criteria were randomized and non-randomized clinical trials, and before-and-after studies on patients with obesity subjected to periodontal therapy. The results were synthesized qualitatively. Risk of bias within studies was assessed using RoB 2 and ROBINS-I tools. The certainty of evidence was evaluated following the GRADE approach. Three randomized controlled trials and 15 before-and-after studies were included. Randomized controlled trials were considered to have a low risk of bias, as compared to before-and-after studies assessed as having low, serious, and critical risks of bias. Non-surgical periodontal therapy plus azithromycin, chlorhexidine, and cetylpyridinium chloride reduced blood pressure and decreased serum levels of HbA1c, hsCRP, IL-1ß, and TNF-α. Salivary resistin level also decreased in patients with obesity and periodontitis after therapy and chlorhexidine mouth rinse. Before-and-after data suggest an improvement in total cholesterol, LDL, triglycerides, insulin resistance, C3, GCF levels of TNF-α, chemerin, vaspin, omentin-1, visfatin, 8-OHdG, and periodontal pathogen counts after therapy.

Are temporomandibular disorders associated with facial asymmetry? A systematic review and meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVE: To assess scientific evidence of the association between temporomandibular joint (TMJ) disorders and facial asymmetry (FA). METHODS: A systematic review was performed in accordance with the PRISMA checklist. A search strategy was developed in electronic databases including MEDLINE, Scopus, Web of Science, Virtual Health Library and Cochrane Library until January 2020. Eligibility criteria included observational studies that investigated the occurrence of FA among patients with and without signs and symptoms of TMJ disorders. Risk of bias of individual studies was analysed after study selection and data collection processes according to Fowkes and Fulton guidelines. Four meta-analyses (MA) were performed to evaluate the association between TMJ disorders and linear/angular menton deviation, subgrouping the studies into unilateral and bilateral cases. The evidence was certainty-tested using the GRADE approach. RESULTS: The search retrieved 2371 studies, 31 of which were eligible for full-text reading. Seven cross-sectional clinical studies met the eligibility criteria and were included in the qualitative synthesis, comprising a total of 621 subjects (345 with TMJ disease and 276 in control group), four of which were classified as being methodologically sound. Five studies were eligible for quantitative synthesis. Linear and angular menton deviation was greater in individuals with unilateral TMJ disorders than controls (MD = 2.41 [0.33, 4.50] P = .02; I2  = 86% and MD = 2.68 [0.99, 4.38] P = .002; I2  = 0%, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Despite the low certainty in evidence, the present study indicated that unilateral TMJ disorders are associated with FA. However, longitudinal studies with greater certainty of evidence should be conducted to achieve a stronger estimate of this association.

Early or delayed palatoplasty in complete unilateral cleft lip and palate patients? A systematic review of the effects on maxillary growth.

The aim of this study was to review the effects of early and late hard palate repair on maxillary growth. PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, LILACS, Cochrane Library CENTRAL databases, OpenGrey, Google Scholar, and Clinical Trials were searched using a PICO strategy, with terms related to unilateral cleft lip and palate (UCLP) and timing of repair. Methodological quality evaluation was carried out using the Fowkes and Fulton guidelines, and quality (or certainty) of evidence and strength of recommendations were evaluated using GRADE (grading of recommendations, assessment, development and evaluation). Five retrospective and non-randomized studies were included in the study. Folkes and Fulton assessment showed a high risk of bias in all articles and very low levels of certainty (GRADE). The results showed conflicting findings for comparisons of the effects of timing of repair of hard palate in UCLP. Two studies presented better maxillary growth in a group operated on later (18 months after birth), two presented no differences between the results, and another presented better results in the group operated on earlier than 18 months of age. At this point, it cannot be proven or refuted that postponing hard palate surgery brings benefits for maxillary growth. Studies included in this review did not show similar conclusions. Randomized clinical trials present some ethical issues that make them difficult to perform.

Do HEMA-free adhesive systems have better clinical performance than HEMA-containing systems in noncarious cervical lesions? A systematic review and meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVES: To determine through a systematic review whether HEMA-free adhesive systems have better clinical performance than HEMA-containing systems in noncarious cervical lesion (NCCL) restorations. SOURCES: We systematically searched PubMed, The Cochrane Library, Scopus, Web of Science, and Open Grey databases using MeSH terms, synonyms, and keywords, with no language or date restriction. The reference lists of included articles were manually searched. STUDY SELECTION: Randomized controlled clinical trials comparing the effectiveness of HEMA-free and HEMA-containing adhesive systems in NCCL restorations were included. The risk of bias in the included studies was assessed and classified through the Cochrane Collaboration's common scheme for bias. Quantitative data were subgrouped according to the main clinical parameters evaluated, and heterogeneity was tested using I2 index. DATA: A total of 2889 potentially relevant studies were identified. After title and abstract examination, 51 studies remained. Finally, 22 studies were included in the systematic review, totaling to 997 participants. Thus, 13 studies were classified as "low" risk of bias and nine as "unclear". These 22 studies were also included in the meta-analysis, and no significant statistical difference was found between the clinical performances of HEMA-free and HEMA-containing adhesive systems for all parameters analyzed: retention risk difference (RD) 0.03 [-0.01, 0.07] (p = 0.13); marginal discoloration RD 0.02 [-0.01, 0.04] (p = 0.19); marginal adaptation RD -0.01 [-0.04, 0.01] (p = 0.34); caries RD 0.00 [-0.01, 0.01] (p = 0.92); or postoperative sensitivity RD -0.00 [-0.02, 0.01] (p = 0.72) and for overall effect RD 0.00 [-0.01, 0.01] (p = 0.65). CONCLUSIONS: HEMA-free and HEMA-containing adhesive systems showed a similar clinical performance in NCCL restorations. CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE: Only the presence of HEMA does not indicate better clinical performance of adhesive systems.