Conclusions ART single-surface restorations  presented high survival percentages in both primary and permanent posterior teeth , whilst ART multiple-surface restorations presented lower survival percentages .
ART sealants presented a high-caries-preventive effect .
Clinical relevance ART is an effective evidence -based option for treating and preventing carious lesions in primary and permanent posterior teeth
Objective The aim of the present study is to up date the results of two previous meta-analyses , published in 2006 and 2012 , on the survival percentages of  atraumatic restorative treatment ( ART ) restorations and ART sealants .
The current meta- analysis includes Chinese publications not investigated before .
One-year evaluation of atraumatic restorative treatment and minimum intervention techniques on primary teeth.
Atraumatic restorative treatment ( ART ) and minimal intervention treatment ( MIT ) techniques were evaluated under field conditions in 5 regions of the Western Cape Province of South Africa , where caries prevalence exceeds 60 % and remains mostly untreated . The purpose of the study was to compare and evaluate results of  ART and MIT techniques in the primary dentition of 6 - 9 year-old schoolchildren using  glass-ionomer ( GI ) ( Fuji IX ) and compomer ( Dyract AP ) material s. At baseline 401 children were treated , and 1,119 restorations  placed by 5 calibrated dentists , 53 % with ART ( using h and instruments only ) and 47 % with MIT ( minimal use of slow h and -piece ) techniques . Evaluations were done with a CPI periodontal probe to measure marginal defects and to detect decay . A pain assessment for the restoration procedures indicated that 80 % of subjects experienced no pain , 18 % discomfort and slight pain , and 2 % required local anaesthetic . After one year 90.5 % of subjects and 80 % of restorations were followed up ( 11.1 % lost as a result of exfoliation ) ; of these restorations 86 % were clinical ly acceptable ( 84.1 % of the ART and 88 % of the MIT ) . With the art technique 82.7 % of GI restorations and 85.6 % , of compomer restorations were acceptable . With the MIT technique 86.5 % of GI restorations and 89.9 % of compomer restorations were acceptable . Success of restorations per region varied significantly : regions 1 and 2 - 90 % , region 3 - 80 % , region 4 - 70 % and region 5 - 95 % . There were no significant statistical differences in respect of material s or methods employed . ART and MIT techniques were well accepted as complementary caries approaches by operators . One-year results show that ART and MIT techniques were successful , substantiating its use for the primary dentition in areas with high caries prevalence . Longer-term assessment s are required
Conclusions ART single-surface restorations  presented high survival percentages in both primary and permanent posterior teeth , whilst ART multiple-surface restorations presented lower survival percentages .
ART sealants presented a high-caries-preventive effect .
Clinical relevance ART is an effective evidence -based option for treating and preventing carious lesions in primary and permanent posterior teeth
Objective The aim of the present study is to up date the results of two previous meta-analyses , published in 2006 and 2012 , on the survival percentages of  atraumatic restorative treatment ( ART ) restorations and ART sealants .
The current meta- analysis includes Chinese publications not investigated before .