Are hypomineralised lesions on second primary molars (HSPM) a predictive sign of molar incisor hypomineralisation (MIH)? A systematic review and a meta-analysis

Molar Incisor Hypomineralisation (MIH) and Hypomineralised Second Primary Molars (HSPM) involve qualitative structural developmental anomalies of tooth enamel affecting the first permanent molars (and often incisors) and the second primary molars, respectively. A putative relationship between HSPM a...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Journal of dentistry 2018-05, Vol.72, p.8-13
Main Authors: Garot, Elsa, Denis, Alice, Delbos, Yves, Manton, David, Silva, Mihiri, Rouas, Patrick
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Age
Bias
Children
Data mining
Defects
Dental caries
Dental enamel
Dentistry
Developmental Defects of Enamel
DMH
Enamel
HSPM
Hypomineralisation
Incisors
Lesions
Mathematical analysis
Meta-analysis
MIH
Mineralization
Molars
Nitric-oxide synthase
Studies
Systematic review
Teeth
Citations: Items that this one cites
Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:Molar Incisor Hypomineralisation (MIH) and Hypomineralised Second Primary Molars (HSPM) involve qualitative structural developmental anomalies of tooth enamel affecting the first permanent molars (and often incisors) and the second primary molars, respectively. A putative relationship between HSPM and MIH has been reported in the scientific literature. The aim was to determine whether children with HSPM are more likely to develop MIH. A systematic search using PubMed/Medline, Embase and Cochrane Library electronic databases for publications from 2001 to August 2017 investigating the link between MIH and HSPM was undertaken. Four reviewers selected the studies independently, extracted the data according to PRISMA statement, and assessed the bias risk with the Newcastle–Ottawa Scale (NOS) criteria. From 645 potentially eligible studies, 14 were selected for full text analysis and 5 were included in the meta-analysis. Cross-sectional and cohort studies were reported and 4662 participants were included. The meta-analyses were performed with a random model calculated an OR total of 4.66 (95% CI 2.11–10.26; P 
ISSN:0300-5712
1879-176X
DOI:10.1016/j.jdent.2018.03.005