Radiation of parotid or submandibular glands is effective for drooling in patients with parkinsonism; a randomised double-blind placebo-controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Drooling is a common symptom in patients with parkinsonism, causing physical and emotional distress. It is unknown which major salivary glands are the best candidates for irradiation to reduce drooling with minimal adverse events. Therefore, this study assessed the efficacy and safety of submandibular and parotid salivary gland irradiation to reduce drooling. METHODS: A prospective, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial was conducted at the University Medical Center Groningen, the Netherlands. After informed consent, 31 patients with parkinsonism and severe drooling according to the Unified Parkinson Disease Rating Scale (UPDRS) were included in this study. Exclusion criteria consisted of the use of anticholinergic drugs, the existence of salivary gland diseases, and/or an history of (pre)malignancies of the salivary glands. Patients were randomized for parotid-, submandibular- or sham irradiation (2x6 Gy with one week interval). Patients were evaluated at 1, 3, 6 and 12 months after radiation. Primary outcome measure was drooling severity according to the UPDRS. Secondary outcomes measures consisted of stimulated glandular salivary secretion rates and adverse effects. FINDINGS: Overall 31 parkinsonian patients were included. Initially 11 patients were radiated on the parotid glands, 10 patients on the submandibular glands and 10 patients were sham-radiated. After 6 months, the sham-radiated patients were actively treated after a second randomisation. One patient in the parotid radiation group discontinued his participation after three months due to physical deterioration. Radiation of parotid or submandibular glands significantly improved the existing drooling, as compared to placebo radiation. Parotid- and submandibular radiation was equally effective, but more patients in the submandibular radiated group reported sticky saliva vs. patients treated by parotid radiation (33∙33% vs. 13∙33%). INTERPRETATION: Major salivary gland radiation significantly improves drooling in parkinsonian patients with few adverse effects. However, parotid gland radiation is accompanied by fewer side effects and therefore is the preferred mode of radiation in this patient population.

Influence of Preparation Design and Restorative Material on Fatigue and Fracture Strength of Restored Maxillary Premolars.

STATEMENT OF PROBLEM: Extensive carious lesions and/or large preexisting restorations possibly contribute to crack formation, ultimately resulting in a fracture that may lead to the loss of a tooth cusp. Hence, preparation design strategy in conjunction with the restorative material selected could be influential in the occurrence of a cuspal fracture. PURPOSE: The purpose of this in vitro study was to evaluate the fatigue behavior and fracture strength of maxillary premolars restored with direct composite and indirect ceramic inlays and overlays, with different preparation depths in the presence or absence of cuspal coverage, and analyze their failure types. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Sound maxillary premolars (N=90; n=10) were divided into nine groups: group C: control; group DCI3: direct composite inlay 3 mm; group DCI5: direct composite inlay 5 mm; group ICI3: indirect ceramic inlay 3 mm; group ICI5: indirect ceramic inlay 5 mm; group DCO3: direct composite overlay 3 mm; group DCO5: direct composite overlay 5 mm; group ICO3: indirect ceramic overlay 3 mm; group ICO5: indirect ceramic overlay 5 mm. In indirect ceramic, lithium disilicate restoration groups, immediate dentin sealing was applied. After restoration, all specimens were tested in fatigue (1,200,000 cycles, 50 N, 1.7 Hz). Samples were critically appraised, and the specimens without failure were subjected to a load to failure test. Failure types were classified and the data analyzed. RESULTS: Zero failures were observed in the fatigue testing. The following mean load to failure strengths (N) were recorded: group ICO5: 858 N; group DCI3: 829 N; group ICO3: 816 N; group C: 804 N; group ICI3: 681 N; group DCO5: 635 N; group DCI5: 528 N; group DCO3: 507 N; group ICI5: 482 N. Zero interaction was found between design-depth-material (p=0.468). However, significant interactions were found for the design-depth (p=0.012) and design-material (p=0.006). Within restorations at preparation depth of 3 mm, direct composite overlays obtained a significantly lower fracture strength in comparison to indirect ceramic onlays (p=0.013) and direct composite inlays (p=0.028). In restorations at depth 5 mm, significantly higher fracture load values were observed in indirect ceramic overlays compared with the inlays (p=0.018). Indirect ceramic overlays on 3 mm were significantly stronger than the deep inlays in ceramic (p=0.002) and tended to be stronger than the deep direct composite inlays. Severe, nonreparable fractures were observed with preparation depth of 5 mm within ceramic groups. CONCLUSIONS: The preparation depth significantly affected the fracture strength of tooth when restored with either composite or ceramic materials. Upon deep cavity preparations, cuspal coverage proved to be beneficial when a glass ceramic was used as the restorative material. Upon shallow cavity preparations, a minimally invasive approach regarding preparation design used in conjunction with a direct composite material was favorable.

Prospective Randomized Clinical Trial on the Survival of Lithium Disilicate Posterior Partial Crowns Bonded Using Immediate or Delayed Dentin Sealing: Short-term Results on Tooth Sensitivity and Patient Satisfaction.

This prospective randomized clinical trial evaluated tooth sensitivity and patient satisfaction after the provision of partial ceramic restorations bonded using immediate (IDS) or delayed dentin sealing (DDS) on vital molar teeth through a within-subject comparison study. Between December 2013 and May 2016, a total of 30 patients (13 women, 17 men; mean age, 54 years old) received two lithium disilicate ceramic (IPS-e.max press, Ivoclar Vivadent) partial restorations on vital first or second molar teeth (N=60). The two teeth randomly received either IDS (test group, n=30) or DDS (control group, n=30). Partial preparations were performed on all teeth and directly after tooth preparation. IDS was achieved using self-etch adhesive (Clearfil SE Primer and Adhesive, Kuraray) followed by the application of flowable resin (Clearfil Majesty Flow, Kuraray). Partial ceramic restorations were bonded (Variolink Ultra, Ivoclar Vivadent) two weeks after preparation. The teeth were evaluated preoperatively and at one week, three months, and 12 months postoperatively using a cold test and a questionnaire for perceived tooth sensitivity. Patient satisfaction was evaluated using a visual analog scale (VAS). Data were analyzed using McNemar, chi-squared, and Wilcoxon signed rank tests (α=0.01). There was no significant difference in patient-reported tooth sensitivity between the preoperative phase and all other time points (p>0.01). There was also no significant difference between IDS and DDS (p>0.01) for all items on the questionnaire. VAS scores did not differ significantly between the IDS and DDS groups for all items in the questionnaire at all time points (p>0.01). No tooth sensitivity change was noticed with the application of partial ceramic indirect restorations. This clinical study could not confirm that IDS is more advantageous than DDS in terms of tooth sensitivity and patient satisfaction at 1 year of clinical service of partial ceramic restorations.

Randomized clinical trial on the survival of lithium disilicate posterior partial restorations bonded using immediate or delayed dentin sealing after 3 years of function.

OBJECTIVES: The survival and success rate and the quality of survival of partial ceramic restorations bonded employing Immediate (IDS) or Delayed Dentin Sealing (DDS) in vital molar teeth were evaluated in a randomized clinical trial with within-subject comparison study. MATERIALS AND METHODS: 30 patients received two lithium disilicate ceramic (IPS-e.max press, Ivoclar Vivadent) partial restorations on vital first or second molar teeth (N = 60). The two teeth randomly received either IDS (test group, n = 30) or DDS (control group, n = 30). Partial ceramic restorations were luted (Variolink Ultra, Ivoclar Vivadent) two weeks after preparation. Evaluations were performed at 1 week, 12 months and 36 months post-operatively, using qualitative (FDI) criteria. Representative failures were evaluated microscopically (SEM) and by means of simplified qualitative fractography analysis. RESULTS: One absolute failure occurred in the DDS group due to (secondary) caries. The overall survival rate according to Kaplan-Meier after 3 years was 98.3% (FDI criteria score 1-4, n = 59) and the overall success rate was 85% (FDI criteria score 1-3, n = 51), with no significant difference between restorations in the IDS and DDS group (p = 0.32; Kaplan-Meier, Log Rank (Mantel-Cox), CI = 95%). For the quality of the survival, no statistically significant differences were found between IDS and DDS (p = 0.7; Kaplan-Meier, Log Rank (Mantel-Cox), CI = 95%) restorations on any follow-up timepoints for any of the FDI criteria (Wilcoxon, McNemar, p > 0.05). CONCLUSION: Adhesively luted partial ceramic restorations in vital molar teeth have a good prognosis, however IDS did not show any differences in success and survival rates after 3 years of function.

A systematic review and meta-analysis of 3-unit fixed dental prostheses: Are the results of 2 abutment implants comparable to the results of 2 abutment teeth?

The purpose of the systematic review and meta-analysis was to compare the performance of 3-unit bridges on teeth with 3-unit bridges on implants, evaluating survival of the bridges, survival of the teeth or implants, condition of the hard and soft tissues surrounding the supports, complications and patient-reported outcome measures (PROM) after a mean observation period of at least 1 year. A literature search was conducted using a combination of the search terms: fixed partial denture and fixed dental prostheses (FDPs). An electronic search for data published until January 2017 was undertaken using the MEDLINE, EMBASE and Cochrane Library databases. Eligibility criteria included clinical human studies, either randomised or not, interventional or observational, which evaluated the results of 3-unit FDPs on either 2 implants or 2 abutment teeth. The search identified 1686 unique references. After applying eligibility criteria, 66 articles were included in the analysis. A total of 1973 3-unit FDPs were supported by teeth, and 765 were implant-supported. No significant differences were found either in the survival of the supporting abutments (P = .52; 99% vs 98.7% survival per year) or in the survival of the prostheses (P = .34; 96.4% vs 97.4% survival per year). Both treatments show an almost equally low complication rate, but there is a low level of reporting of hard and soft tissue conditions and PROM. It is concluded that implant-supported 3-unit FDPs seem to be a reliable treatment with survival rates not significantly different from the results of teeth-supported 3-unit FDPs.