Book now

Call us to book an appointment today!

9188 8599

We have an advance medical research and documentation.

Choose subject articles
back Articles
More articles

Effects of ozone therapy on facial nerve regeneration

Ozone treatment for headaches

Ozone treatment of coxarthrosis

Ozone for heart disease

Ozone therapy on cardiac function case study

Ozone Treatment for Low Back Pain Effectiveness

Ozone therapy in lumbar sciatic pain

Ozone Therapy as Adjuvant for Cancer Treatment

Ozonated Saline Solution’s Clinical Use

Knee Joint Osteoarthrosis Treatment with Ozone Therapy

Ozone treatment for herniated discs before and after

Ozone gas treatment in spinal disc herniation (usefulness)

Xenon and Ozone treatment

Combined Effect of Ozone + Xenon Against Lyme-like Symptoms

Can knee pain be treated by Ozone Therapy?

Ozone treatment and diabetic foot ulcers

Xenon

CFS & the Neuroprotective Effect of Xenon

Xenon chronic fatigue

Can Chronic Fatigue Syndrome Be Treated By Xenon?

Xenon Therapy

Xenon Antibacterial Effect

Xenon and Ozone treatment

Combined Effect of Ozone + Xenon against Lyme-like Symptoms

Scroll for more

Keywords: Dental caries, ozone therapy

Objective

This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to investigate the effectiveness and safety of ozone therapy for treating dental caries.

Methods

We searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in 8 databases, from inception to April 4, 2020 (MEDLINE, EMBASE, CENTRAL, LILACS, Bibliografia Brasileira de Odontologia, ClinicalTrials.gov, WHO, and OpenGrey). Primary outcome measures were antimicrobial effect and adverse events. We used the Cochrane risk of bias tool to evaluate methodological quality of included RCTs and GRADE approach to evaluate the certainty of the evidence. We used the Review Manager software to conduct meta-analyses.

Results

We included 12 RCTs comparing ozone therapy with no ozone, chlorhexidine digluconate, fissure sealants (alone and added to ozone), and fluoride. Considering primary outcomes, ozone therapy showed (a) lower reduction in the bacterial number than chlorhexidine digluconate in children (mean difference [MD]: −5.65 [−9.79 to −1.51]), but no difference was observed in adults (MD: −0.10 [−1.07 to 0.88]); (b) higher reduction in the bacterial number than sealant (MD: 12.60 [3.86-21.34]), but no difference was observed after final excavation (MD: −0.00 [−0.01 to 0.01]). Regarding the safety of ozone therapy, results from individual studies presented no adverse events during or after treatment. Most of these results are imprecise and should be interpreted with caution because of clinical and methodological concerns, small sample size, and wide confidence interval, precluding to determine the real effect direction.

Conclusion

Based on very low certainty of the evidence, there is not enough support from published RCTs to recommend the use of ozone for the treatment of dental caries. Well-conducted studies should be encouraged, measuring mainly the antimicrobial effects of the therapy at the long term and following the recommendations of the CONSORT statement for the reporting of RCTs.

 

Citation

Giovanna Marcílio Santos, Rafael Leite Pacheco, Sandra Kalil Bussadori, Elaine Marcílio Santos, Rachel Riera, Carolina de Oliveira Cruz Latorraca, Pamela Mota, Elisa Fatima Benavent Caldas Bellotto, Ana Luiza Cabrera Martimbianco,
Effectiveness and Safety of Ozone Therapy in Dental Caries Treatment: Systematic Review and Meta-analysis,
Journal of Evidence-Based Dental Practice,
Volume 20, Issue 4,
2020,
101472,
ISSN 1532-3382,
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jebdp.2020.101472.
(http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1532338220301202)
Abstract: Objective
This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to investigate the effectiveness and safety of ozone therapy for treating dental caries.
Methods
We searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in 8 databases, from inception to April 4, 2020 (MEDLINE, EMBASE, CENTRAL, LILACS, Bibliografia Brasileira de Odontologia, ClinicalTrials.gov, WHO, and OpenGrey). Primary outcome measures were antimicrobial effect and adverse events. We used the Cochrane risk of bias tool to evaluate methodological quality of included RCTs and GRADE approach to evaluate the certainty of the evidence. We used the Review Manager software to conduct meta-analyses.
Results
We included 12 RCTs comparing ozone therapy with no ozone, chlorhexidine digluconate, fissure sealants (alone and added to ozone), and fluoride. Considering primary outcomes, ozone therapy showed (a) lower reduction in the bacterial number than chlorhexidine digluconate in children (mean difference [MD]: −5.65 [−9.79 to −1.51]), but no difference was observed in adults (MD: −0.10 [−1.07 to 0.88]); (b) higher reduction in the bacterial number than sealant (MD: 12.60 [3.86-21.34]), but no difference was observed after final excavation (MD: −0.00 [−0.01 to 0.01]). Regarding safety of ozone therapy, results from individual studies presented no adverse events during or after treatment. Most of these results are imprecise and should be interpreted with caution because of clinical and methodological concerns, small sample size, and wide confidence interval, precluding to determine the real effect direction.
Conclusion
Based on a very low certainty of evidence, there is not enough support from published RCTs to recommend the use of ozone for the treatment of dental caries. Well-conducted studies should be encouraged, measuring mainly the antimicrobial effects of ozone therapy at long term and following the recommendations of the CONSORT statement for the reporting of RCTs.
Keywords: Dental caries; ozone; systematic review; evidence-based dentistry

Discover the benefits of the ozone.