High-viscosity glass-ionomer cement or composite resin for restorations in posterior permanent teeth? A systematic review and meta-analyses.

OBJECTIVES: Answer the PICO question: Do class I and II posterior restorations in permanent teeth placed with high-viscosity glass-ionomer cement (HV-GIC) fail more than composite resin (CR) restorations? DATA: The study was registered in the PROSPERO database (CRD42020138290). Randomized and controlled clinical trials, comparing the performance of HV-GIC and CR in load bearing cavities of posterior permanent teeth were included. Cochrane risk of bias tool and GRADE were used to assess the quality and certainty of the evidence. Meta-analyses were performed for clinical outcomes on USPHS and FDI criteria for 12-, 24- and 36-months follow-ups. SOURCES: PubMed, Scopus and Web of Science were last searched on April 2, 2022, without language or date restrictions. Reference lists of primary studies and their related article link in PubMed were manually searched. STUDY SELECTION: Ten studies were included, while data from 8 were used for the meta-analyses. A total of 849 HV-GIC and 800 CR restorations were followed. The primary outcome was the fracture/retention of the restoration, with a comparable performance for both materials on all follow-ups. The 36 months follow-up for class I restorations (longest) showed risk difference of -0,00 (95%CI -0,03 to 0,03; p = 0,98) and no heterogeneity (p = 0,98, I2=0%). The certainty of the evidence is moderate, as all included studies were at an uncertain risk of bias. CONCLUSIONS: HV-GIC and CR presented comparable clinical performance in posterior permanent teeth up to 36 months. HV-GIV wear in class I restorations followed by 24 months was the only poorer result compared to CR. CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE: Conservative load bearing cavities in permanent posterior teeth can be restored with HV-GIC with comparable clinical performance to CR expected at least up to 3 years. HV-GIC is a valuable direct restorative option for posterior teeth in high caries risk patients, in which CR is frequently associated with failure.

Single nucleotide polymorphism rs4284505 in microRNA17 and risk of dental fluorosis.

OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study is to evaluate the association between the single nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) rs4284505 within the gene that codifies microRNA17 (miRNA17) and dental fluorosis (DF) in a group of children. METHODS: Children living in a city with fluoridation of public water supplies were included. DF was assessed in erupted permanent teeth by Dean's modified index. The miR-SNP rs4284505 was selected in miRNA17 and genotyping was carried out by real-time PCR. Genotype and allelic distributions between DF and control, and between DF phenotypes (mild, moderate and severe) and control were analysed. RESULTS: Among a total of 527 children enrolled for the study, 383 were DF free and 144 presented DF. In the dominant model analysis (AA + AG vs. GG) the miR-SNP rs4284505 was associated with moderate DF, with carriers of the GG genotype having an increased risk of more than two times for DF (p = 0.031; Odds Ratio = 2.26, Confidence Interval 95%= 1.04-4.73). Allelic distribution showed borderline statistical significance for moderate DF with the carriers of G allele having an increased risk for DF (p = .050; Odds Ratio = 1.75, Confidence Interval 95%= 1.00-3.12). CONCLUSION: The miR-SNP rs4284505 in miRNA17 was associated with an increased risk of DF.

Does computerized anaesthesia reduce pain during local anaesthesia in paediatric patients for dental treatment? A systematic review and meta-analysis.

This systematic review and meta-analysis analysed whether pain and disruptive behaviour can be decreased by the use of computerized local dental anaesthesia (CDLA) in children. The literature was screened to select randomized clinical trials that compared computerized and conventional anaesthesia. The primary outcome was pain perception during anaesthesia; the secondary, disruptive behaviour. The risk of bias of individual papers and the quality of the evidence were evaluated. After search, 8389 records were found and 20 studies remained for the qualitative and quantitative syntheses. High heterogeneity was detected for both outcomes. For the pain perception, the overall analysis showed a standard mean difference of -0.78 (-1.31, -0.25) favouring CDLA; however, when only studies at low risk of bias were analysed (subgroup analysis), there was no difference between the two techniques [-0.12(-0.46, 0.22)]. For disruptive behaviour, no differences were detected for continuous [-0.26 (-0.68, 0.16)] or dichotomous data [0.81 (0.62, 1.06)]. The quality of evidence was judged as low for pain perception and very low for disruptive behaviour. It is concluded that there is no difference in the pain perception and disruptive behaviour in children subjected to computerized or conventional dental local anaesthesia. Notwithstanding, the quality of the available evidence is low.

Effect of ibuprofen on the efficacy of inferior alveolar nerve block in patients with irreversible pulpitis: A meta-analysis.

The aim of this study was to compare preventive ibuprofen administration to placebo on the efficacy of inferior alveolar nerve block in patients with irreversible pulpitis. A search was performed in PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, LILACS, BBO, Cochrane Library, SIGLE, and grey literature. The risk of bias was evaluated through the Cochrane Collaboration's tool. The quality of evidence was assessed using the GRADE approach. Only seven studies remained for the meta-analysis. Administering ibuprofen before anaesthesia increased the success rate of injectable anaesthesia (RR = 1.79; 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.32-2.42; P = 0.0002) even in cases of symptomatic irreversible pulpitis (RR = 1.55; 95% CI 1.05-2.29; P = 0.03). The intensity of pain was lower for ibuprofen (standardised difference means (SMD) = -3.73; 95% CI -6.43 to -1.04; P = 0.007). Ibuprofen as premedication is beneficial for the success of inferior alveolar nerve block.

Efficacy of a new light-cured anesthetic gel for clamp placement before rubber dam isolation in children: A triple-blinded randomized controlled clinical trial.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the efficacy of a new light-cured anesthetic gel for pain control associated with the clamp placement for rubber dam isolation in children. METHODS: 82 children in need of sealant placement on the first permanent mandibular molars were selected to take part in this randomized, split-mouth, triple-blinded study. Before rubber dam placement, the light-cured anesthetic gel (test) or a placebo gel (control) was applied on the gingival margins of the molars. The hemi-arches were isolated with cotton rolls and the gels were applied; the anesthetic gel was light-cured. After 30 seconds, clamp #26 was positioned on tooth 36 or 46. If there was pain, the clamp was removed and rescue anesthesia was applied. The absolute risk and intensity of pain were registered using three scales: facial expression (Wong-Baker), observational (FLACC) and numerical (NRS). Data were analyzed by McNemar's test and Wilcoxon Signed Rank (α= 5%). RESULTS: Differences were detected for the risk of pain between groups (P= 0.0002) and for the different intensity of pain scales used (P< 0.001) with positive results for the anesthetic gel. CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE: The new developed light-cured topical anesthetic is an alternative to infiltrative anesthesia for pain control during clamp adaptation for rubber dam isolation. Its use helps to overcome the fear of needles, which can trigger pain, anxiety and discomfort for the majority of the patients, hampering the behavior management in children.

Effects of Ibuprofen Compared to Other Premedication Drugs on the Risk and Intensity of Postendodontic Pain: A Systematic Review.

OBJECTIVE: This systematic review aims to evaluate the effects of ibuprofen compared to other drugs on the risk and intensity of postoperative pain resulting from endodontic treatment in adult patients. METHODS: A systematic search was carried out through Medline databases (Pubmed, Scopus, Web of Science, Cochrane, Lilacs, and BBO). There was no restriction on the publication year or idiom. The gray literature was explored. The Periodicos Capes Theses Databases and ProQuest Dissertations were also searched, as well as the unpublished and ongoing trials registry and the IADR abstracts (1990-2016). Solely randomized clinical trials that compared the risk or intensity of pain resulting from endodontic treatment in adult patients were included in this systematic review. The risk of bias of the articles was evaluated using the Cochrane Collaboration's tool. A random-effect meta-analysis was conducted for ibuprofen versus placebo and ibuprofen versus other drugs at 6, 8, and 24 hours. The GRADE approach was used to assess the quality of the evidence. RESULTS: A total of 1132 studies were identified, and only seven meet the eligibility criteria. No difference between the groups was detected in any of the meta-analysis. An exception was observed when one study was removed from the meta-analysis of pain intensity at 24 hours for ibuprofen versus placebo, favoring ibuprofen (SMD -0.67; 95% CI -1.05 to -0.17). The quality of evidence in all meta-analyses was graded as low or very low. CONCLUSION: Results of the present systematic review indicate that there is no clear evidence supporting that preoperative ibuprofen is better than other drugs in reducing the risk and intensity of postendodontic pain.

Intrapocket topical anesthetic versus injected anesthetic for pain control during scaling and root planing in adult patients: Systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: In this systematic review and meta-analysis, the authors evaluated the pain during scaling and root planing with use of topical anesthetic versus that with the use of injected anesthetic in adult patients. TYPES OF STUDIES REVIEWED: The authors searched 6 databases for randomized clinical trials in which the investigators compared the clinical effectiveness of intrapocket and injectable anesthetics. The primary outcome was the risk of developing pain or intensity of pain. Quality assessment followed the guidelines from the Cochrane Collaboration's risk-of-bias tool. The authors performed meta-analyses on studies considered at low and unclear risk of bias. RESULTS: From 976 articles identified, 6 remained in the qualitative synthesis (4 at low and 2 at unclear risk of bias). Injected anesthetic produced lower pain intensity than did anesthetic gel (P = .03) and required less rescue anesthetic than did topical anesthetic (P < .0001). There was no difference in patient preference (P = .09). CONCLUSIONS AND PRACTICAL IMPLICATIONS: Injected anesthetic decreased the intensity of pain and the need for rescue anesthetic during scaling and root planing, but the risk of developing pain yielded similar results for injected and topical anesthetics.

Intra-pocket anaesthesia and pain during probing, scaling and root planing: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

AIM: A systematic review/meta-analysis was performed to evaluate pain during probing, scaling and root planing using intra-pocket anaesthesia versus placebo in adult patients. METHODS: A search was performed in PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, Latin American and Caribbean Health Sciences Literature database, Brazilian Library in Dentistry, Cochrane Library and Grey literature. IADR abstracts, unpublished trials registries, dissertations and theses were also searched for randomized clinical trials comparing the clinical effectiveness of intra-pocket anaesthesia and placebo. Risk/intensity of pain was the primary outcome. The risk of bias tool from the Cochrane Collaboration was used for quality assessment. Meta-analysis was performed on studies considered at low risk of bias. RESULTS: A total of 1740 articles were identified. Eleven remained in the qualitative synthesis, and nine studies were considered at "low" risk of bias for meta-analysis. Standardized Hedge's g mean difference for pain intensity using visual analogue scale and Heft-Parker pain scales was -0.576 (95% confidence interval [CI] -0.94 to -0.22; p = 0.002) and for verbal rating scale pain scale it was -1.814 (95% CI -3.38 to -0.245; p = 0.023). The odds ratio for the risk of pain was 0.025 (95% CI 0.003 to 0.25; p = 0.002) and the odds ratio for the need for rescue anaesthesia it was 0.358 (95% CI 0.174 to 0.736; p = 0.005). CONCLUSIONS: The anaesthetic gel decreases the risk and intensity of pain during probing/SRP.