Objective The present review systematically analyzed clinical studies investigating the efficacy of resin infiltration on post-orthodontic or non-post-orthodontic, white spot lesions (WSL), or fluorosis. Materials Five electronic databases (Central, PubMed, Ovid MEDLINE, Ovid EMBASE, LILACS) were screened. Article selection and data abstraction were done in duplicate. No language or time restrictions were applied. Outcomes were visual-tactile or DIAGNOdent measurements. Results Eleven studies with 1834 teeth being affected in 413 patients were included. Nine studies were randomized control trials, one a prospective cohort study, and one had an unclear study design. Meta-analysis could be performed for “resin infiltration vs. untreated control,” “resin infiltration vs. fluoride varnish,” and “resin infiltration without bleaching vs. resin infiltration with bleaching.” WSL being treated with resin infiltration showed a significantly higher optical improvement than WSL without any treatment (standard mean difference (SMD) [95% CI] = 1.24 [0.59, 1.88], moderate level of evidence [visual-tactile assessment]) and with fluoride varnish application (mean difference (MD) [95% CI] = 4.76 [0.74, 8.78], moderate level of evidence [DIAGNOdent reading]). In patients with fluorosis, bleaching prior to resin infiltration showed no difference in the masking effect compared to infiltration alone (MD [95% CI] = − 0.30 [− 0.98, 0.39], moderate level of evidence). Conclusion Resin infiltration has a significantly higher masking effect than natural remineralization or regular application of fluoride varnishes. However, although the evidence was graded as moderate, this conclusion is based on only very few well-conducted RCTs. Clinical relevance Resin infiltration seems to be a viable option to esthetically mask enamel white spot lesions and fluorosis.

Summary Objectives Objective of this trial was to assess the masking results in initial caries lesions (ICL) that were resin infiltrated during fixed orthodontic treatment in comparison to contralateral teeth that were fluoridated only. Trial design A randomized, controlled, split-mouth trial. Methods Adolescent patients (age range: 12–18 years) with fixed orthodontic appliances who had developed ICL [ICDAS 1 or 2 (International Caries Detection and Assessment System)] during orthodontic treatment were consecutively recruited and randomly assigned to either resin infiltration (Icon) with up to 3 etching procedures (Inf) or to a fluoride varnish (Tiefenfluorid) (FV). Both interventions were performed according to the manufacturer’s recommendations. Outcome assessors were blinded to the applied intervention. Primary and secondary outcomes included the evaluation of the appearance of the ICL before (T0) and 1 week after (T1) treatment by digital photographs (ΔE), laser fluorescence readings (DD), and ICDAS scores. Blinding Due to the treatment nature neither the operators nor the patients could be blinded. However, outcome assessors and the statistician were blinded. Results Fifteen patients (9 female) with 60 ICL were included (mean age: 14.6 years). At baseline FV and Inf did not differ significantly in ΔE (median ΔE0,T (25th/75th percentiles):10.7(9.1/20.9): ΔE0,I:13.4(10.3/18.5); P = 0.469), DD (P = 0.867) and ICDAS (P = 0.521). One-week after treatment (T1) ΔE values (P < 0.001), DD values (P < 0.001), and ICDAS scores (P = 0.014) for Inf were significantly reduced, whereas ΔE values (P = 0.125) and ICDAS scores (P = 0.073) for FV remained unchanged. Limitation Natural remineralizing in the standard interventional control group cannot be observed yet, since up to 6 months are needed to naturally remineralize ICL. Conclusions Based on our short-term data, resin infiltration effectively masked ICL during treatment with fixed orthodontic appliances. Fluoridation was not able to immediately improve the visual appearance of ICL. Further longer-term assessment should focus not only on the aesthetic outcome, but also on the caries inhibitory effect of resin infiltration during treatment with fixed orthodontic appliances. Trial registration German Clinical Trials Register (DRKS-ID: DRKS00011797).