RESUMEN
OBJECTIVE: To provide a narrative review of the preprocedural mouth rinse protocols suggested for oral surgery in order to contrast the presence of SARS-CoV-2 in aerosol. SOURCES AND METHODS: Electronic searches were performed in medical databases PubMed, Medline, CINAHN and Scopus to identify relevant studies published up until the third week of April 2020. This research was supplemented by exploration through a web-based search engine as well as a manual search for international and national guidelines. Studies and protocols which suggested preoperative mouth rinsing as a recommended measure during the COVID-19 outbreak were included. Given the small number of studies, a narrative literature review was conducted. In total, 15 references (11 articles and 4 guidelines) were considered relevant and were critically analysed. CONCLUSION: The findings show a high heterogeneity in the protocols suggested. Further research is required to better understand the viral features and epidemiologic characteristics of this new virus and to test the efficacy of commonly used antiseptics against SARS-CoV-2 in future clinical trials. However, the use of chlorhexidine, hydrogen peroxide, PVP-I and cetylpyridinium chloride in contrasting the spread of Covid-19 is described as advisable and substantial in different publications.
RESUMEN
OBJECTIVE: The restorative treatment of a decayed, non-vital upper premolar often requires an interdisciplinary approach. Esthetics and the entity of the masticatory loads are usually affecting the choice of procedures and materials. A conservative treatment in a case with esthetic needs and functional requirements is investigated in this case report. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A case of a 45- year- old woman with a severely decayed upper premolar is presented. The tooth has been previously treated in an emergency department with a provisional endodontic medication, but a further treatment has been then performed. The tooth was painful at the moment of the visit and the carious lesion appeared to invade the subgingival level. A surgical-conservative approach has been selected involving crown lengthening, endodontic treatment and a prosthetic crown with a monolithic Lithium-Silicate. RESULTS: The rehabilitative process required 3 months, including maturation times after surgery and the placement of the provisional crown. The patient claimed to be both esthetically and functionally satisfied with the restoration. CONCLUSION: A conservative treatment of a severely involved tooth requires a critical evaluation of the remaining structures and a precise selection of the restorative materials. A monolithic crown could represent an ideal solution for restoring an upper premolar requiring esthetics and solid function, but the choice of a high translucent, easily polishable and possibly even chair-side prosthetic material might be an appreciable added value for clinicians.