iDentistry The Journal Volume 14 No 2 | Page 3

The Journal EDITORIAL MICRO-INVASIVE DENTISTRY Proximal dental lesions, limited to dentine, are traditionally treated by invasive (drill and fill) means. Non-invasive alternatives (e.g. fluoride varnish, flossing) might avoid substance loss but their effectiveness depends on patients' adherence. Recently, micro-invasive approaches for treating proximal caries lesions have been tried. These interventions install a barrier either on top (sealing) or within (infiltrating) the lesion. Micro-invasive treatment seems more efficacious to arrest early (non-cavitated) proximal carious lesions than non-invasive treatment (NI). Uncertainty remains as to the efficacy of sealing versus infiltration and the robustness of the evidence. The available evidence shows that micro-invasive treatment of proximal caries lesions arrests non-cavitated enamel and initial dentinal lesions (limited to outer third of dentine, based on radiograph) and is significantly more effective than non-invasive professional treatment (e.g. fluoride varnish) or advice (e.g. to floss). We can be moderately confident that further research is unlikely to substantially change the estimate of effect. Different methods and materials currently available for micro- invasive treatments are sealing via resin sealants, (polyurethane) patches/tapes, glass ionomer cements (GIC) or resin infiltration. Practitioners should strive to perform micro-invasive treatment instead of NI for early proximal lesions. The decision between sealing or infiltration should be guided by practical concerns beyond efficacy. Dr. Amrit Raj Bahl Editor-in-Chief 2 Vol. 14 No. 2 May-August 2018