Factors influencing the clinical performance of the restoration of endodontically treated teeth: An assessment of systematic reviews of clinical studies.

STATEMENT OF PROBLEM: How best to restore endodontically treated teeth is still unclear because many types of material and techniques are involved. PURPOSE: The purpose of this overview of systematic reviews of clinical studies was to assess the available evidence-based literature on the influence of associated clinical factors on the clinical performance (survival, failure rate, or success) of restored endodontically treated teeth. MATERIAL AND METHODS: PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science were searched from inception until September 27, 2021, to identify systematic reviews. Two reviewers independently screened titles, abstracts, and full-text articles, and each reviewer extracted the data of half of the included studies. A single reviewer with an independent verifier completed the quality appraisal. A descriptive analysis of the collected data was made. RESULTS: A total of 36 systematic reviews fulfilled the inclusion criteria. The factors most assessed were the type of coronal restorative technique (n=22) and type of post (n=22). The results indicated that metal and fiber posts seem to present similar clinical performance, endocrowns could be a suitable restorative option, there is no evidence to confirm whether single crowns are better or worse than direct restoration, the maintenance of the coronal structure is a fundamental factor, and the ferrule effect is still a controversial topic. Most of the studies (n=30, 81%) presented a final Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations (GRADE) rating of "critically low." CONCLUSIONS: The post type does not appear to influence the clinical performance of restored endodontically treated teeth. However, conclusive evidence to suggest how different materials or techniques for restoring coronal tooth structure affect the clinical performance of such restorations, as well as the impact of the ferrule effect, is still lacking.

Restorative preferences and choices of dentists and students for restoring endodontically treated teeth: A systematic review of survey studies.

STATEMENT OF PROBLEM: The best protocol to restore endodontically treated teeth is still unclear, with many factors to be considered, including the selection and necessity of a post, the type of coronal restoration, the amount of remaining coronal structure, and the type of luting agent. PURPOSE: The purpose of this systematic review was to assess the restorative preferences for endodontically treated teeth between dentists and dental students. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Survey studies, written in English, of dentists and dental students, which evaluated the use of intracanal posts and other restorative options for endodontically treated teeth, were selected. Searches were performed in the PubMed and SCOPUS databases without time restriction. Screening and data extraction were performed by 2 researchers independently. A standardized outline was used to extract the data (questions related to the theme and the response rate of each question on the survey), and the risk of bias was assessed. Descriptive analysis was performed of the collected information. RESULTS: Twenty-five articles were included. Most dentists who answered the surveys reported the time since graduation as 1 to 20 years (40%), and 44% were specialists. The most reported choices concerning the type of posts used were prefabricated posts (45.8%), cast metal posts (16.7%), and both posts (16.7%). The cast metal posts were cited more frequently in surveys published between 1994 and 2010, whereas prefabricated posts, both metal and glass fiber ones, were cited between 2006 and 2019. The preferred luting agent for intracanal posts was resin-based (47%). These choices seem to have been influenced by time and by the level of postgraduate training. CONCLUSIONS: Restorative preferences related to posts have changed over time, from the use of cast posts to prefabricated ones or the use of both posts and seem to be influenced by experience and postgraduate training.

Effect of Recreational Intervention on the Approach of Pediatric Patients in Dental Treatment: Analysis of Salivary Cortisol

Abstract Objective: To verify whether recreational interaction with pediatric patient before dental care influences cortisol levels and anxiety. Material and Methods: Twelve children were selected and divided into two groups: 6 children who had not previously received recreational intervention (Group I) and 6 children who received recreational intervention before dental care (Group II). Saliva was collected with Salivettes™ kits before and soon after dental care for the measurement of cortisol. Wilcoxon test was applied to verify the difference in salivary cortisol levels before and after the dental visit in the whole sample, and the Mann-Whitney U test was used to analyze the difference between groups I and II. A significance level of 0.05 was considered. Results: Among patients from Group I, 3 had their cortisol levels increased after dental care, 2 had their cortisol levels decreased, and the other 1 patient remained constant. All participants from Group II had no significant difference in cortisol levels pre- and post-procedure. Mean salivary cortisol level was higher in Group I, pre- and post-procedure, compared to Group II. Conclusion: Pediatric patients who participated in an interactive activity prior to dental care have a lower level of anxiety according to the salivary cortisol levels obtained, compared to patients who did not participate in recreation. The techniques for the dentist to approach the child control the anxiety of the patient and make the procedure calmer and less stressful for both of them.