Micro-invasive interventions for managing proximal dental decay in primary and permanent teeth.

BACKGROUND: 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. Different methods and materials are currently available for micro-invasive treatments, such as sealing via resin sealants, (polyurethane) patches/tapes, glass ionomer cements (GIC) or resin infiltration. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the effects of micro-invasive treatments for managing proximal caries lesions in primary and permanent dentition in children and adults. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the following databases to 31 December 2014: the Cochrane Oral Health Group Trials Register, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE via OVID, EMBASE via OVID, LILACs via BIREME Virtual Health Library, Web of Science Conference Proceedings, ZETOC Conference Proceedings, Proquest Dissertations and Theses, ClinicalTrials.gov, OpenGrey and the World Health Organization (WHO) International Clinical Trials Registry Platform. We searched the metaRegister of Controlled Trials to 1 October 2014. There were no language or date restrictions in the searches of the electronic databases. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomised controlled trials of at least six months' duration that compared micro-invasive treatments for managing non-cavitated proximal dental decay in primary teeth, permanent teeth or both, versus non-invasive measures, invasive means, no intervention or placebo. We also included studies that compared different types of micro-invasive treatments. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently screened search results, extracted data and assessed the risk of bias. We used standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane to evaluate risk of bias and synthesise data. We conducted meta-analyses with the random-effects model, using the Becker-Balagtas method to calculate the odds ratio (OR) for lesion progression. We assessed the quality of the evidence using GRADE methods. MAIN RESULTS: We included eight trials, which randomised 365 participants. The trials all used a split-mouth design, some with more than one pair of lesions treated within the same participant. Studies took place in university or dental public health clinics in Brazil, Colombia, Denmark, Germany, Thailand, Greenland and Chile. Six studies evaluated the effects of micro-invasive treatments in the permanent dentition and two studies on the primary dentition, with caries risk ranging from low to high. Investigators measured caries risk in different studies either by caries experience alone or by using the Cariogram programme, which combines eight contributing factors, including caries experience, diet, saliva and other factors related to caries. The follow-up period in the trials ranged from one to three years. All studies used lesion progression as the primary outcome, evaluating it by different methods of reading radiographs. Four studies received industry support to carry out the research, with one of them being carried out by inventors of the intervention.We judged seven studies to be at high overall risk of bias, primarily due to lack of blinding of participants and personnel. We evaluated intervention effects for all micro-invasive therapies and analysed subgroups according to the different treatment methods reported in the included studies.Our meta-analysis, which pooled the most sensitive set of data (in terms of measurement method) from studies presenting data in a format suitable for meta-analysis, showed that micro-invasive treatment significantly reduced the odds of lesion progression compared with non-invasive treatment (e.g fluoride varnish) or oral hygiene advice (e.g to floss) (OR 0.24, 95% CI 0.14 to 0.41; 602 lesions; seven studies; I(2) = 32%). There was no evidence of subgroup differences (P = 0.36).The four studies that measured adverse events reported no adverse events after micro-invasive treatment. Most studies did not report on any further outcomes.We assessed the quality of evidence for micro-invasive treatments as moderate. It remains unclear which micro-invasive treatment is more advantageous, or if certain clinical conditions or patient characteristics are better suited for micro-invasive treatments than others. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: 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. Due to the small number of studies, it does remain unclear which micro-invasive technique offers the greatest benefit, or whether the effects of micro-invasive treatment confer greater or lesser benefit according to different clinical or patient considerations.

Replacement versus repair of defective restorations in adults: resin composite.

BACKGROUND: Composite filling materials have been increasingly used for the restoration of posterior teeth in recent years as a tooth-coloured alternative to amalgam. As with any filling material composites have a finite life-span. Traditionally, replacement was the ideal approach to treat defective composite restorations, however, repairing composites offers an alternative more conservative approach to the tooth structure where restorations are partly still serviceable. Repairing the restoration has the potential of taking less time and may sometimes be performed without the use of local anaesthesia hence it may be less distressing for a patient when compared with replacement. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the effects of replacing (with resin composite) versus repair (with resin composite) in the management of defective resin composite dental restorations in permanent molar and premolar teeth. SEARCH METHODS: For the identification of studies relevant to this review we searched the Cochrane Oral Health Group's Trials Register (to 24 July 2013); the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (The Cochrane Library 2013, Issue 6); MEDLINE via OVID (1946 to 24 July 2013); EMBASE via OVID (1980 to 24 July 2013); BIOSIS via Web of Knowledge (1969 to 24 July 2013); Web of Science (1945 to 24 July 2013); and OpenGrey (to 24 July 2013). Researchers, experts and organisations known to be involved in this field were contacted in order to trace unpublished or ongoing studies. No restrictions were placed on the language or date of publication when searching the electronic databases. SELECTION CRITERIA: Trials were selected if they met the following criteria: randomised controlled trial (including split-mouth studies), involving replacement and repair of resin composite restorations in adults with a defective molar restoration in a permanent molar or premolar teeth. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently assessed titles and abstracts for each article identified by the searches in order to decide whether the article was likely to be relevant. Full papers were obtained for relevant articles and both review authors studied these. The Cochrane Collaboration statistical guidelines were to be followed for data synthesis. MAIN RESULTS: The search strategy retrieved 298 potentially eligible studies, after de-duplication. After examination of the titles and abstracts, full texts of potentially relevant studies were retrieved but none of the retrieved studies met the inclusion criteria of the review. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: There are no published randomised controlled trials relevant to this review question. There is therefore a need for methodologically sound randomised controlled trials that are reported according to the Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials (CONSORT) statement (www.consort-statement.org/). Further research also needs to explore qualitatively the views of patients on repairing versus replacement and investigate themes around pain, anxiety and distress, time and costs.

Replacement versus repair of defective restorations in adults: amalgam.

BACKGROUND: Amalgam is a common filling material for posterior teeth, as with any restoration amalgams have a finite life-span. Traditionally replacement was the ideal approach to treat defective amalgam restorations, however, repair offers an alternative more conservative approach where restorations are only partially defective. Repairing a restoration has the potential of taking less time and may sometimes be performed without the use of local anaesthesia hence it may be less distressing for a patient when compared with replacement. Repair of amalgam restorations is often more conservative of the tooth structure than replacement. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the effects of replacing (with amalgam) versus repair (with amalgam) in the management of defective amalgam dental restorations in permanent molar and premolar teeth. SEARCH METHODS: For the identification of studies relevant to this review we searched the Cochrane Oral Health Group's Trials Register (to 5 August 2013); the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (The Cochrane Library 2013, Issue 7); MEDLINE via OVID (1946 to 5 August 2013); EMBASE via OVID (1980 to 5 August 2013); BIOSIS via Web of Knowledge (1969 to 5 August 2013); Web of Science (1945 to 5 August 2013) and OpenGrey (to 5 August 2013). Researchers, experts and organisations known to be involved in this field were contacted in order to trace unpublished or ongoing studies. No restrictions were placed on the language or date of publication when searching the electronic databases. SELECTION CRITERIA: Trials were selected if they met the following criteria: randomised controlled trial (including split-mouth studies), involving replacement and repair of amalgam restorations in adults with a defective restoration in a molar or premolar tooth/teeth. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently assessed titles and abstracts for each article identified by the searches in order to decide whether the article was likely to be relevant. Full papers were obtained for relevant articles and both review authors studied these. The Cochrane Collaboration statistical guidelines were to be followed for data synthesis. MAIN RESULTS: The search strategy retrieved 201 potentially eligible studies after de-duplication. After examination of the titles and abstracts, full texts of the relevant studies were retrieved but none of these met the inclusion criteria of the review. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: There are no published randomised controlled trials relevant to this review question. There is therefore a need for methodologically sound randomised controlled trials that are reported according to the Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials (CONSORT) statement (www.consort-statement.org/). Further research also needs to explore qualitatively the views of patients on repairing versus replacement and investigate themes around pain, distress and anxiety, time and costs.

Zygomatic implants: the impact of zygoma bone support on biomechanics.

Maxillectomy and severely resorbed maxilla are challenging to restore with provision of removable prostheses. Dental implants are essential to restore esthetics and function and subsequently quality of life in such group of patients. Zygomatic implants reduce the complications associated with bone grafting procedures and simplify the rehabilitation of atrophic maxilla and maxillectomy. The purpose of this study was to compare, by means of 3-dimensional finite element analysis, the impact of different zygomatic bone support (10, 15, and 20 mm) on the biomechanics of zygomatic implants. Results indicated that maximum stresses within the fixture were increased by 3 times when bone support decreased from 20 to 10 mm and were concentrated at the fixture/bone interface. However, stresses within the abutment screw and the abutment itself were not significantly different regardless of the bone support level. Supporting bone at 10 mm sustained double the stresses of 15 and 20 mm. Fixture's deflection was decreased by 2 to 3 times when bone support level increased to 15 mm and 20 mm, respectively. It was concluded that zygomatic bone support should not be less than 15 mm, and abutment screw is not at risk of fracture regardless of the zygomatic bone support.

Marginal bone loss influence on the biomechanics of single implant crowns.

Marginal bone loss, whether it is physiological or pathological, is one of the implant treatment complications. The biomechanical consequences of marginal bone loss could be catastrophic particularly when the abutment screw is at supraosseous level. This study aimed at investigating marginal bone loss influence on the biomechanics of single implant crown using finite element (FE) analysis. Four FE models for a 3.5 × 13 mm implant supported by 4 bone levels (8.5 mm, 10 mm, 11.5 mm, and 13 mm) were subjected to 3 loading conditions: vertical, oblique, and horizontal. The results indicated 5-10 times increase in maximum von Mises stresses under oblique and horizontal loading. The maximum stresses within the fixture were concentrated at the bone/fixture interface with highest value under horizontal loading at 10 mm bone support. Abutment screw was most susceptible to fracture as the highest stress was concentrated at the screw/fixture interface. Cortical bone suffered its greatest stress level at the fixture/bone interface at 10 mm bone support. However, increasing bone support to 11.5 mm has improved the fracture resistance of the abutment screw to a great extent especially under oblique and vertical loading. Severe marginal bone loss might be attributed for abutment screw and fixture head fracture especially under horizontal loading.

Dental workforce development as part of the oral health agenda for Brunei Darussalam.

BACKGROUND: Brunei Darussalam is a Sultanate with a Malay Islamic monarchy. There are high levels of dental disease among its 406,200 population. The population's oral health needs require an integrated blend of primary and specialist care, together with oral health promotion. PROCESS AND OUTCOMES: This paper describes the planning and measures taken to address these needs. In accordance with an oral health agenda published and launched in 2008, focusing on access, health promotion and prevention, and the education and training of the dental workforce, the Brunei Darussalam Ministry of Health is seeking to improve oral health status and reduce the burden of oral disease. It also seeks to transform the country's oral health services into a preventatively orientated, high-quality, seamless service underpinned by the concept of 'teeth for life'. In the process of effecting this transition, the Brunei Darussalam Ministry of Health is developing a dental workforce fit for future purpose, with an emphasis on a modern approach to skill mix. An important element of this programme has been the development of a highly successful Brunei Darussalam Diploma in Dental Therapy and Dental Hygiene. CONCLUSION: It is concluded that the Brunei Darussalam oral health agenda and, in particular, the forward-looking programme of dental workforce development is a model for other countries facing similar oral health challenges.

Replacement versus repair of defective restorations in adults: amalgam.

BACKGROUND: Amalgam is a common filling material for posterior teeth, as with any restoration amalgams have a finite life-span. Traditionally replacement was the ideal approach to treat defective amalgam restorations, however, repair offers an alternative more conservative approach where restorations are only partially defective. Repairing a restoration has the potential of taking less time and may sometimes be performed without the use of local anaesthesia hence it may be less distressing for a patient when compared with replacement. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the effectiveness of replacement (with amalgam) versus repair (with amalgam) in the management of defective amalgam dental restorations in permanent molar and premolar teeth. SEARCH STRATEGY: For the identification of studies relevant to this review we searched the Cochrane Oral Health Group Trials Register (to 23rd September 2009); CENTRAL (The Cochrane Library 2009, Issue 4); MEDLINE (1950 to 23rd September 2009); EMBASE (1980 to 23rd September 2009); ISI Web of Science (SCIE, SSCI) (1981 to 22nd December 2009); ISI Web of Science Conference Proceedings (1990 to 22nd December 2009); BIOSIS (1985 to 22nd December 2009); and OpenSIGLE (1980 to 2005). Researchers, experts and organisations known to be involved in this field were contacted in order to trace unpublished or ongoing studies. There were no language limitations. SELECTION CRITERIA: Trials were selected if they met the following criteria: randomised or quasi-randomised controlled trial, involving replacement and repair of amalgam restorations. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently assessed titles and abstracts for each article identified by the searches in order to decide whether the article was likely to be relevant. Full papers were obtained for relevant articles and both review authors studied these. The Cochrane Collaboration statistical guidelines were to be followed for data synthesis. MAIN RESULTS: The search strategy retrieved 145 potentially eligible studies, after de-duplication and examination of the titles and abstracts all but three studies were deemed irrelevant. After further analysis of the full texts of the three studies identified, none of the retrieved studies met the inclusion criteria and all were excluded from this review. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: There are no published randomised controlled clinical trials relevant to this review question. There is therefore a need for methodologically sound randomised controlled clinical trials that are reported according to the Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials (CONSORT) statement (www.consort-statement.org/). Further research also needs to explore qualitatively the views of patients on repairing versus replacement and investigate themes around pain, distress and anxiety, time and costs.

Replacement versus repair of defective restorations in adults: resin composite.

BACKGROUND: Composite filling materials have been increasingly used for the restoration of posterior teeth in recent years as a tooth coloured alternative to amalgam. As with any filling material composites have a finite life-span. Traditionally, replacement was the ideal approach to treat defective composite restorations, however, repairing composites offers an alternative more conservative approach where restorations are partly still serviceable. Repairing the restoration has the potential of taking less time and may sometimes be performed without the use of local anaesthesia hence it may be less distressing for a patient when compared with replacement. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the effectiveness of replacement (with resin composite) versus repair (with resin composite) in the management of defective resin composite dental restorations in permanent molar and premolar teeth. SEARCH STRATEGY: For the identification of studies relevant to this review we searched the Cochrane Oral Health Group Trials Register (to 23rd September 2009); CENTRAL (The Cochrane Library 2009, Issue 4); MEDLINE (1950 to 23rd September 2009); EMBASE (1980 to 23rd September 2009); ISI Web of Science (SCIE, SSCI) (1981 to 22nd December 2009); ISI Web of Science Conference Proceedings (1990 to 22nd December 2009); BIOSIS (1985 to 22nd December 2009); and OpenSIGLE (1980 to 2005). Researchers, experts and organisations known to be involved in this field were contacted in order to trace unpublished or ongoing studies. There were no language limitations. SELECTION CRITERIA: Trials were selected if they met the following criteria: randomised or quasi-randomised controlled trial, involving replacement and repair of resin composite restorations. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently assessed titles and abstracts for each article identified by the searches in order to decide whether the article was likely to be relevant. Full papers were obtained for relevant articles and both review authors studied these. The Cochrane Collaboration statistical guidelines were to be followed for data synthesis. MAIN RESULTS: The search strategy retrieved 279 potentially eligible studies, after de-duplication and examination of the titles and abstracts all but four studies were deemed irrelevant. After further analysis of the full texts of the four studies identified, none of the retrieved studies met the inclusion criteria and all were excluded from this review. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: There are no published randomised controlled clinical trials relevant to this review question. There is therefore a need for methodologically sound randomised controlled clinical trials that are reported according to the Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials (CONSORT) statement (www.consort-statement.org/). Further research also needs to explore qualitatively the views of patients on repairing versus replacement and investigate themes around pain, anxiety and distress, time and costs.

Effect of distance from curing light tip to restoration surface on depth of cure of composite resin.

AIMS: While light-activating composite resins, the light tip may not always be close to the surface of the restoration. This may be intentional in an attempt to create a ramp cure. The aim of this study was to determine the effect of a range of separation distances between the light tip and the restoration surface on the depth of composite cure for different types of light-curing units with a broad range of outputs. METHODS: Three halogen light units, one plasma arc-curing (PAC) light unit and two light-emitting diode (LED) curing lights in clinical use were tested, and a total of 570 restorations cured in a two-part human tooth model at separations ranging from 0 to 15 mm. The tooth was disassembled and depth of cure determined using the scrape test ISO 4049. Light intensity was also measured at each separation distance for each light. RESULTS: The depth of cure was generally found to decrease as the separation distance increased for all lights at the various cure times. However, the effect of increasing the separation distance was less than anticipated. The depth of cure was also related to the light output. CONCLUSIONS: Depth of composite cure was directly related to intensity and duration of light exposure and inversely related to distance of the light source from the surface for halogen and plasma lights. However, the effect of increasing the separation distance up to 15 mm was less than expected. Altering the separation distance in order to modify the polymerisation characteristics is unlikely to be effective.

The effect of infection-control barriers on the light intensity of light-cure units and depth of cure of composite.

AIM: Dental curing lights are vulnerable to contamination with oral fluids during routine intra-oral use. This controlled study aimed to evaluate whether or not disposable transparent barriers placed over the light-guide tip would affect light output intensity or the subsequent depth of cure of a composite restoration. METHODS: The impact on light intensity emitted from high-, medium- and low-output light-cure units in the presence of two commercially available disposable infection-control barriers was evaluated against a no-barrier control. Power density measurements from the three intensity light-cure units were recorded with a radiometer, then converted to a digital image using an intra-oral camera and values determined using a commercial computer program. For each curing unit, the measurements were repeated on ten separate occasions with each barrier and the control. Depth of cure was evaluated using a scrape test in a natural tooth model. RESULTS: At each level of light output, the two disposable barriers produced a significant reduction in the mean power density readings compared to the no-barrier control (P<0.005). The cure sleeve inhibited light output to a greater extent than either the cling film or the control (P<0.005). Only composite restorations light-activated by the high level unit demonstrated a small but significant decrease in the depth of cure compared to the control (P<0.05). CONCLUSION: Placing disposable barriers over the light-guide tip reduced the light intensity from all three curing lights. There was no impact on depth of cure except for the high-output light, where a small decrease in cure depth was noted but this was not considered clinically significant. Disposable barriers can be recommended for use with light-cure lights.

Extrasinus zygomatic implant placement in the rehabilitation of the atrophic maxilla: three-dimensional finite element stress analysis.

Placement of zygomatic implants lateral to the maxillary sinus, according to the extrasinus protocol, is one of the treatment options in the rehabilitation of severely atrophic maxilla or following maxillectomy surgery in patients with head and neck cancer. The aim of this study was to investigate the mechanical behavior of a full-arch fixed prosthesis supported by 4 zygomatic implants in the atrophic maxilla under occlusal loading. Results indicated that maximum von Mises stresses were significantly higher under lateral loading compared with vertical loading within the prosthesis and its supporting implants. Peak stresses were concentrated at the prosthesis-abutments interface under vertical loading and the internal line angles of the prosthesis under lateral loading. The zygomatic supporting bone suffered significantly lower stresses. However, the alveolar bone suffered a comparatively higher level of stresses, particularly under lateral loading. Prosthesis displacement under vertical loading was higher than under lateral loading. The zygomatic bone suffered lower stresses than the alveolar bone and prosthesis-implant complex under both vertical and lateral loading. Lateral loading caused a higher level of stresses than vertical loading.

The use of topical guanethidine in the relief of dentine hypersensitivity: a controlled study.

After a pilot study had indicated that the topical application of guanethidine might be of value in the treatment of tooth dentine hypersensitivity, a double-blind study was undertaken to investigate whether guanethidine was more effective than a distilled water control in alleviating dentinal pain. In 39 adult subjects, who had complained of dentine hypersensitivity, a 1 sec blast of air from a dental 3-in-1 syringe was directed onto sensitive root dentine at an angle of 90 degrees from a distance of 1 cm. The severity of the resulting pain was indicated by the subject on a 10 cm visual analogue scale (VAS). One droplet of either 1% guanethidine monosulphate (Ismelin, Ciba-Geigy) or distilled water, allocated at random, was applied to the dentine for 1 min. The tooth was re-tested with the standardised air blast and a second VAS was marked by the subject. In total, 19 patients received guanethidine and 20 received water. VAS scores before treatment in the 2 groups treated with either guanethidine or water (means: 6.5 +/- 2.2 and 6.0 +/- 2.5, respectively) were not significantly different (Mann-Whitney, P = 0.48) whereas the VAS scores in the 2 groups after treatment with guanethidine or water (means: 2.7 +/- 2.4 and 4.8 +/- 2.9, respectively) were significantly different (Mann-Whitney, P < 0.02). It was concluded that guanethidine reduced dentinal hypersensitivity more effectively than distilled water.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)

Stress analysis of occlusal forces in canine teeth and their role in the development of non-carious cervical lesions: abfraction.

Non-carious cervical tooth lesions for many decades were attributed to the effects of abrasion and erosion mainly through toothbrush trauma, abrasive toothpaste, and erosive acids. However, though the above may be involved, more recently a biomechanical theory for the formation of these lesions has arisen, and the term abfraction was coined. The aim of this study was to investigate the biomechanics of abfraction lesions in upper canine teeth under axial and lateral loading conditions using a three-dimensional finite element analysis. An extracted human upper canine tooth was scanned by µCT machine (Skyscan, Belgium). These µCT scans were segmented, reconstructed, and meshed using ScanIP (Simpleware, Exeter, UK) to create a three-dimensional finite element model. A 100 N load was applied axially at the incisal edge and laterally at 45° midpalatally to the long axis of the canine tooth. Separately, 200 N axial and non-axial loads were applied simultaneously to the tooth. It was found that stresses were concentrated at the CEJ in all scenarios. Lateral loading produced maximum stresses greater than axial loading, and pulp tissues, however, experienced minimum levels of stresses. This study has contributed towards the understanding of the aetiology of non-carious cervical lesions which is a key in their clinical management.