Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 8 de 8
Filtrar
1.
J Indian Soc Periodontol ; 27(3): 262-272, 2023.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37346854

RESUMEN

In the recent years, platelet-rich fibrin (PRF) has gained importance in regenerative medicine due to its attributed tissue-inducing properties. However, it is still unclear whether there are benefits from using PRF with open flap debridement (OFD) for the treatment of intrabony defects compared to OFD alone. For this reason, in this study, we performed an overview of systematic reviews with Friendly Summaries of the Body of Evidence using Epistemonikos methodology on the use of PRF with OFD compared to OFD alone for the treatment of intrabony defects. We performed a systematic search in the Epistemonikos database. We extracted data from the included systematic reviews and reanalyzed the data of primary studies and generated a summary of the findings table. We used Review Manager (RevMan) v5.3 software and GRADEpro software for data analysis and data presentation. Eighteen systematic reviews were included after full-text screening, which had 16 clinical trials. Results were reported by the mean difference (MD); the following outcomes were analyzed: change in intrabony defect depth (MD: 1.37 mm more), change in radiographic bone defect filling (MD: 37.26% more), change in probing depth (MD: 1.22 mm more), change in clinical attachment level (MD: 1.32 mm more), and change in gingival margin level (MD: 0.31 more). We concluded that applying PRF with OFD to treat an intrabony defect has some clinical advantages compared to OFD alone.

2.
J Clin Epidemiol ; 149: 195-202, 2022 09.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35597369

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: The coronavirus disease 2019 Living OVerview of Evidence (COVID-19 L·OVE) is a public repository and classification platform for COVID-19 articles. The repository contains more than 430,000 articles as of September 20, 2021 and intends to provide a one-stop shop for COVID-19 evidence. Considering that systematic reviews conduct high-quality searches, this study assesses the comprehensiveness and currency of the repository against the total number of studies in a representative sample of COVID-19 systematic reviews. METHODS: Our sample was generated from all the studies included in the systematic reviews of COVID-19 published during April 2021. We estimated the comprehensiveness of COVID-19 L·OVE repository by determining how many of the individual studies in the sample were included in the COVID-19 L·OVE repository. We estimated the currency as the percentage of studies that was available in the COVID-19 L·OVE repository at the time the systematic reviews conducted their own search. RESULTS: We identified 83 eligible systematic reviews that included 2,132 studies. COVID-19 L·OVE had an overall comprehensiveness of 99.67% (2,125/2,132). The overall currency of the repository, that is, the proportion of articles that would have been obtained if the search of the reviews was conducted in COVID-19 L·OVE instead of searching the original sources, was 96.48% (2,057/2,132). Both the comprehensiveness and the currency were 100% for randomized trials (82/82). CONCLUSION: The COVID-19 L·OVE repository is highly comprehensive and current. Using this repository instead of traditional manual searches in multiple databases can save a great amount of work to people conducting systematic reviews and would improve the comprehensiveness and timeliness of evidence syntheses. This tool is particularly important for supporting living evidence synthesis processes.


Asunto(s)
COVID-19 , Humanos , COVID-19/epidemiología , Publicaciones
3.
Medwave ; 22(1): e8320, 2022 Jan 28.
Artículo en Español, Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35100249

RESUMEN

INTRODUCTION: Dental caries have been traditionally managed with the non-selective removal of carious tissue (total removal). However, the adverse effects and fear that this technique produces in patients has promoted the use of more conservative caries removal techniques such as chemo-mechanical removal, but there is still controversy regarding its effectiveness and safety. METHODS: We searched in Epistemonikos, the largest database of systematic reviews in health, which is maintained by screening multiple information sources, including MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane, among others. We extracted data from the systematic reviews, reanalyzed data of primary studies, conducted a meta-analysis and generated a summary of findings tables using the GRADE approach. RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS: We identified seven systematic reviews including 34 studies overall, of which 30 correspond to randomized trials. We concluded that chemo-mechanical caries removal probably reduces the need for anesthesia. Additionally, chemo-mechanical caries removal may decrease the pain experienced by the patient, decrease the risk of restoration failure and increase the time of the procedure for the removal of deep caries, but the certainty of the evidence is low. We are uncertain whether chemo-mechanical caries removal reduces the risk of pulp exposure as the certainty of the evidence has been assessed as very low.


INTRODUCCION: La caries dental tradicionalmente es manejada con la remoción no selectiva del tejido carioso (remoción total). Sin embargo, los efectos adversos y el temor que produce esta técnica en los pacientes ha promovido la utilización de técnicas de remoción de caries más conservadoras como la remoción químico-mecánica, pero aún existe controversia respecto a su efectividad y seguridad. MÉTODOS: Para responder esta pregunta utilizamos Epistemonikos, la mayor base de datos de revisiones sistemáticas en salud, la cual es mantenida mediante búsquedas en múltiples fuentes de información, incluyendo MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, entre otras. Extrajimos los datos desde las revisiones identificadas, analizamos los datos de los estudios primarios, realizamos un metaanálisis y preparamos tablas de resumen de los resultados utilizando el método GRADE. RESULTADOS Y CONCLUSIONES: Identificamos siete revisiones sistemáticas que en conjunto incluyeron 34 estudios primarios, de los cuales 30 corresponden a ensayos aleatorizados. Concluimos que la remoción químico-mecánica de caries probablemente disminuye la necesidad de anestesia. Además, podría disminuir el dolor que experimenta el paciente, disminuir el riesgo del fracaso de la restauración y aumentar el tiempo del procedimiento, pero la certeza de la evidencia es baja. No es posible establecer con claridad si la remoción químico- mecánica disminuye el riesgo de exposición pulpar debido a que la certeza de la evidencia existente ha sido evaluada como muy baja.


Asunto(s)
Caries Dental , Bases de Datos Factuales , Caries Dental/terapia , Susceptibilidad a Caries Dentarias , Humanos , Dolor , Revisiones Sistemáticas como Asunto
4.
BMJ Open ; 11(1): e043004, 2021 01 06.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33408209

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Testing used in screening, diagnosis and follow-up of COVID-19 has been a subject of debate. Several organisations have developed formal advice about testing for COVID-19 to assist in the control of the disease. We collated, delineated and appraised current worldwide recommendations about the role and applications of tests to control SARS-CoV-2/COVID-19. METHODS: We searched for documents providing recommendations for COVID-19 testing in PubMed, EMBASE, LILACS, the Coronavirus Open Access Project living evidence database and relevant websites such as TRIP database, ECRI Guidelines Trust, the GIN database, from inception to 21 September 2020. Two reviewers applied the eligibility criteria to potentially relevant citations without language or geographical restrictions. We extracted data in duplicate, including assessment of methodological quality using the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation-II tool. RESULTS: We included 47 relevant documents and 327 recommendations about testing. Regarding the quality of the documents, we found that the domains with the lowest scores were 'Editorial independence' (Median=4%) and 'Applicability' (Median=6%). Only six documents obtained at least 50% score for the 'Rigour of development' domain. An important number of recommendations focused on the diagnosis of suspected cases (48%) and deisolation measures (11%). The most frequently recommended test was the reverse transcription-PCR (RT-PCR) assay (87 recommendations) and the chest CT (38 recommendations). There were 22 areas of agreement among guidance developers, including the use of RT-PCR for SARS-Cov-2 confirmation, the limited role of bronchoscopy, the use chest CT and chest X-rays for grading severity and the co-assessment for other respiratory pathogens. CONCLUSION: This first scoping review of recommendations for COVID-19 testing showed many limitations in the methodological quality of included guidance documents that could affect the confidence of clinicians in their implementation. Future guidance documents should incorporate a minimum set of key methodological characteristics to enhance their applicability for decision making.


Asunto(s)
Prueba de COVID-19/normas , COVID-19/diagnóstico , Guías de Práctica Clínica como Asunto , SARS-CoV-2 , Tomografía Computarizada por Rayos X/métodos , COVID-19/epidemiología , Humanos , Pandemias
5.
PLoS One ; 15(12): e0242958, 2020.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33301459

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: A false-negative case of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection is defined as a person with suspected infection and an initial negative result by reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) test, with a positive result on a subsequent test. False-negative cases have important implications for isolation and risk of transmission of infected people and for the management of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). We aimed to review and critically appraise evidence about the rate of RT-PCR false-negatives at initial testing for COVID-19. METHODS: We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, LILACS, as well as COVID-19 repositories, including the EPPI-Centre living systematic map of evidence about COVID-19 and the Coronavirus Open Access Project living evidence database. Two authors independently screened and selected studies according to the eligibility criteria and collected data from the included studies. The risk of bias was assessed using the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies (QUADAS-2) tool. We calculated the proportion of false-negative test results using a multilevel mixed-effect logistic regression model. The certainty of the evidence about false-negative cases was rated using the GRADE approach for tests and strategies. All information in this article is current up to July 17, 2020. RESULTS: We included 34 studies enrolling 12,057 COVID-19 confirmed cases. All studies were affected by several risks of bias and applicability concerns. The pooled estimate of false-negative proportion was highly affected by unexplained heterogeneity (tau-squared = 1.39; 90% prediction interval from 0.02 to 0.54). The certainty of the evidence was judged as very low due to the risk of bias, indirectness, and inconsistency issues. CONCLUSIONS: There is substantial and largely unexplained heterogeneity in the proportion of false-negative RT-PCR results. The collected evidence has several limitations, including risk of bias issues, high heterogeneity, and concerns about its applicability. Nonetheless, our findings reinforce the need for repeated testing in patients with suspicion of SARS-Cov-2 infection given that up to 54% of COVID-19 patients may have an initial false-negative RT-PCR (very low certainty of evidence). SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: Protocol available on the OSF website: https://tinyurl.com/vvbgqya.


Asunto(s)
Prueba de Ácido Nucleico para COVID-19 , COVID-19/diagnóstico , SARS-CoV-2/genética , COVID-19/virología , Prueba de Ácido Nucleico para COVID-19/métodos , Reacciones Falso Negativas , Humanos , ARN Viral/genética , ARN Viral/aislamiento & purificación , SARS-CoV-2/aislamiento & purificación
6.
Artículo en Español, Inglés | LILACS-Express | LILACS | ID: biblio-1116705

RESUMEN

En el Ecuador se presenta una alta prevalencia e incidencia de diferentes patologías bucales, este escenario es similar en muchos países de la región. Las enfermedades orales constituyen un problema de salud pública, debido a que requiere un alto costo en su manejo y control; es por ello que se ha generado énfasis en realizar actividades preventivas que permitan mejorar el panorama. Han sido varias las medidas adoptadas por entes gubernamentales en el Ecuador para reducir la incidencia principalmente de caries dental, desde la prevención masiva a través de la fluoración de diferentes elementos de consumo humano, la promoción y prevención de salud oral a través de la enseñanza de técnicas de cepillado dental, difusión del correcto uso de seda dental, detección temprana de placa bacteriana, charlas educativas motivadoras y colocación de sellantes en superficies oclusales de molares definitivos en escolares de poblaciones urbano-marginales y rurales. Sin embargo, dichas estrategias no han conseguido ser monitoreadas, evaluadas ni reportadas para conocer su efectividad en la mejora de la salud oral en nuestro país.


In Ecuador, there is a high prevalence and incidence of different oral pathologies, this scenario is similar in several countries in the region. Oral diseases constitute a Public Health issue, since they involve a high investment in their management and control. Thus, an emphasis in preventive activities has been placed to improve the impact of oral diseases. Several measures have been taken by the Ecuadorian government to reduce the incidence of dental caries, including massive prevention programmes. For instance, fluoridation of food and water, school teaching of right tooth brushing techniques and dental floss use, early detection of bacterial plaque, delivery of educational talks, and sealant placement on occlusal surfaces of permanent teeth in schoolchildren from deprived urban and rural populations. Nevertheless, these strategies have not been monitored, evaluated or reported in order to understand their success in improving the Oral Health status of our country.

7.
Medwave ; 20(1): e7758, 2020 Jan 28.
Artículo en Español, Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31999678

RESUMEN

INTRODUCTION: Dental caries have been conventionally managed by non-selective removal of carious tissue (total complete removal); however, the adverse effects of this procedure have promoted the use of conservative caries removal techniques (selective removal), but there is still controversy regarding its effectiveness. METHODS: We searched in Epistemonikos, the largest database of systematic reviews in health, which is maintained by screening multiple information sources, including MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane, among others. We extracted data from the systematic reviews, reanalyzed data of primary studies, conducted a meta-analysis and generated a summary of findings table using the GRADE approach. RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS: We identified seven systematic reviews including seven studies overall, of which all were randomized trials. We concluded that selective caries removal may decrease the need for root canal treatment and the risk of pulp exposure in teeth with deep caries, but the certainty of the evidence is low. It is not clear whether the selective removal of caries reduces the risk of appearance of signs and symptoms of pulp disease and the risk of restorations failure, as the certainty of the evidence is very low.


INTRODUCCIÓN: La caries dental ha sido convencionalmente manejada mediante la remoción no selectiva del tejido carioso (remoción total), sin embargo, los efectos adversos de este procedimiento han promovido la utilización de técnicas de remoción de caries conservadoras (remoción selectiva), pero aún existe controversia respecto a su efectividad. MÉTODOS: Para responder esta pregunta utilizamos Epistemonikos, la mayor base de datos de revisiones sistemáticas en salud, la cual es mantenida mediante búsquedas en múltiples fuentes de información, incluyendo MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane, entre otras. Extrajimos los datos desde las revisiones identificadas, reanalizamos los datos de los estudios primarios, realizamos un metaanálisis, preparamos tablas de resumen de los resultados utilizando el método GRADE. RESULTADOS Y CONCLUSIONES: Identificamos siete revisiones sistemáticas que en conjunto incluyeron siete estudios primarios, todos ellos correspondientes a ensayos aleatorizados. Concluimos que la remoción selectiva de caries podría disminuir la necesidad de tratamiento de endodoncia y el riesgo de exposición pulpar en dientes con caries profundas, pero la certeza de la evidencia es baja. No existe claridad de que la remoción selectiva de caries disminuya el riesgo de aparición de signos y síntomas de patología pulpar y el riesgo de fracaso de las restauraciones ya que la certeza de la evidencia es muy baja.


Asunto(s)
Tratamiento Conservador/métodos , Caries Dental/terapia , Revisiones Sistemáticas como Asunto , Caries Dental/patología , Humanos , Ensayos Clínicos Controlados Aleatorios como Asunto , Endodoncia Regenerativa , Medición de Riesgo , Resultado del Tratamiento
SELECCIÓN DE REFERENCIAS
DETALLE DE LA BÚSQUEDA
...