Non-operative control of cavitated approximal caries lesions in primary molars: a prospective evaluation of cases

Comparison of three management approaches for dental caries in primary molars: A two-year randomized clinical trial

AIM

to compare two-year clinical success rates of caries management in children (Hall Technique HT, Nonrestorative caries treatment NRCT, Conventional restorations CR), and to evaluate pain perception, behaviour, technique acceptability by patients, parents and dentists.

METHODS

122, 3-8-year-olds were enrolled in 2-year parallel group randomised controlled trial (CR, n = 52, HT, n = 35, NRCT, n = 35). Caries was recorded using Nyvad criteria to measure clinical success/ failure rates. Child's pain perception (Visual Analogue Scale of Faces), child behaviour (Frankl scale), parents' and dentists' treatment opinions (5-point Likert scale) were assessed. Statistical analysis included Chi-square, non-parametric Kruskal-Wallis, Bonferroni-corrected Mann-Whitney U tests (p < 0.05), absolute risk reduction (ARR) and number needed to treat (NNT).

RESULTS

After two years, with 116 participants, clinical success rates were: CR=60.8 % (n = 31), HT=93.8 % (n = 30), NRCT=42.5 % (n = 14) (p < 0.001). Major/minor failure rates differed: CR=17.6 % (n = 9) / 21.6 % (n = 11); HT=6.2 % (n = 2)/ 0 %, NRCT=33.3 % (n = 11)/ 24.2 % (n = 8), (p < 0.05). When comparing HT to CR, ARR = 0.33; NNT= 3 (95 % CI 0.02 -0.58); NRCT to CR, - no observed benefit from NRCT. More than 70 % of children demonstrated "positive/definitely positive" behaviour during treatment. Pain intensity was "very low/low" in 92.3 % of cases for CR, 88.6 % for HT, and 77.1 % for NRCT . NRCT was "very easy" to perform for 82.9 % of participants, compared to 42.3 % for CR and 17.1 % for HT (p < 0.05). CR were reported to take longer than NRCT and HT (p < 0.05).

CONCLUSION

Clinical success rates of HT were superior to CR and NRCT. All treatment techniques were well tolerated by children, CR was more time-consuming and HT - technically more difficult to perform.

CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE

caries management in primary molars can be successfully performed using minimal intervention, particularly, sealing in caries lesions with Hall technique. NRCT can prevent caries progression when adequate access to mechanical plaque disruption and fluoride is provided. However, occasional fluoride application, and uncontrolled toothbrushing with fluoride toothpaste cannot replace restorative procedures.

Evaluation of proximal slicing in primary maxillary incisors with proximal caries- a retrospective cohort study

BACKGROUND

Modern management of dental caries should be more conservative and include early detection of lesions and active surveillance, in order to apply preventive measures and carefully monitor for signs of arrest or progression. Proximal slicing was suggested for nonrestorative caries treatment for primary incisors. The aim of the study was to examine the success of proximal slicing in primary maxillary incisors in arresting caries progression.

METHODS

A retrospective cohort study. Data were collected from medical records of patients who had undergone proximal slicing in primary maxillary incisors with a follow-up period of at least 6 months. Treatment was considered a success when no further invasive clinical intervention was required within the follow-up period of at least 6 months. Treatment was considered a failure when further invasive clinical intervention was needed during the follow-up period (restoration, crown, or extraction). Additional variables included were the patient's gender, treated tooth, treated surface, age during their first visit to the clinic, age during slicing treatment, follow-up period, number of follow-up visits, and number of fluoride applications and additional slicing during follow-up.

RESULTS

Seventy-one patients were included in the study. Proximal slicing was successful in 76% of participants with a follow-up of at least 6 months. Success was associated with older age at the first dental visit (3.5yo vs. 2.5yo, p = 0.0011) and age when proximal slicing was performed (4yo vs. 3yo, p < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

Proximal slicing may successfully arrest proximal caries in primary maxillary incisors.

Evaluation of the Success of Conventional and Biological Restorative Treatment Approaches for Caries in Primary Molars: An In Vivo Study

Background

In order to compare the clinical and radiographic success of three treatment modalities-conventional restoration (CR), nonrestorative caries treatment (NRCT), and Hall technique (HT), with a 3-month to 1 year follow-up in deciduous molars with occlusal or proximal carious lesions.

Design

Children between the ages of 5 and 8 were chosen for the study, having a total of 120 teeth. They were split into three groups, each with 40 participants-CR, HT, and NRCT. Clinical and radiographic evaluation was done at 3, 6, 9, and 12 months. Data were statistically analyzed.

Results

The Chi-squared value and p-value were found to be insignificant when comparing clinical and radiographic ratings of all three groups at 3, 6, 9, and 12-month intervals.

Conclusion

Hall technique (HT) performed better than CR. NRCT was more acceptable to patients than CR.

How to cite this article

Undre MI, Chunawala Y, Choubey S, et al. Evaluation of the Success of Conventional and Biological Restorative Treatment Approaches for Caries in Primary Molars: An In Vivo Study. Int J Clin Pediatr Dent 2023;16(4):591-597.

Knowledge, Attitude, and Practice Behavior of Pediatric Dental Postgraduate Students on Non-restorative Cavity Control Technique: A Cross-sectional Study

Background

In the last few decades, the non-restorative treatment approach had been labeled by different names. The term non-restorative cavity control (NRCC) was recently established in 2016. The study aimed to evaluate the knowledge, attitude, and practice behavior about this technique among pediatric dental postgraduate students in India.

Materials and methods

An 18-item questionnaire was prepared from the previously established literature. The sample size was calculated as 234 responses based on the pilot study. The questionnaires were sent to 1,200 participants through the registered email address and WhatsApp as a Google form link. The online responses were received for a period of 4 weeks from July to August of 2020. The data from the responses were collected and descriptive analysis was done using a Microsoft Excel sheet (Version 2016).

Results

A total of 380 responses were received and 35 duplicate responses were eliminated. Among the 345 respondents, 61 (17.7%) were males and 284 (82.3%) were females. The average age of the participants is 27.43 years. About 78.6% (n = 271), 17.1% (n = 59), and 4.3% (n = 15) of the participants were third-year, second-year, and first-year postgraduate students, respectively. The responses were received from 21 out of 24 states’ colleges which were conducting pediatric dental postgraduate course. About 271 (76.8%) participants knew this technique with a maximum positive attitude and fewer practice behavior.

Conclusion

The knowledge and attitude about NRCC were good among the pediatric dental postgraduate students but implementing that in practice was relatively less.

How to cite this article

Balasubramani K, Asokan S, Geetha Priya PR. Knowledge, Attitude, and Practice Behavior of Pediatric Dental Postgraduate Students on Non-restorative Cavity Control Technique: A Cross-sectional Study. Int J Clin Pediatr Dent 2021;14(2):217–221.

Interventions for treating cavitated or dentine carious lesions

BACKGROUND

Traditionally, cavitated carious lesions and those extending into dentine have been treated by 'complete' removal of carious tissue, i.e. non-selective removal and conventional restoration (CR). Alternative strategies for managing cavitated or dentine carious lesions remove less or none of the carious tissue and include selective carious tissue removal (or selective excavation (SE)), stepwise carious tissue removal (SW), sealing carious lesions using sealant materials, sealing using preformed metal crowns (Hall Technique, HT), and non-restorative cavity control (NRCC).

OBJECTIVES

To determine the comparative effectiveness of interventions (CR, SE, SW, sealing of carious lesions using sealant materials or preformed metal crowns (HT), or NRCC) to treat carious lesions conventionally considered to require restorations (cavitated or micro-cavitated lesions, or occlusal lesions that are clinically non-cavitated but clinically/radiographically extend into dentine) in primary or permanent teeth with vital (sensitive) pulps.

SEARCH METHODS

An information specialist searched four bibliographic databases to 21 July 2020 and used additional search methods to identify published, unpublished and ongoing studies.  SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomised clinical trials comparing different levels of carious tissue removal, as listed above, against each other, placebo, or no treatment. Participants had permanent or primary teeth (or both), and vital pulps (i.e. no irreversible pulpitis/pulp necrosis), and carious lesions conventionally considered to need a restoration (i.e. cavitated lesions, or non- or micro-cavitated lesions radiographically extending into dentine). The primary outcome was failure, a composite measure of pulp exposure, endodontic therapy, tooth extraction, and restorative complications (including resealing of sealed lesions).

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Pairs of review authors independently screened search results, extracted data, and assessed the risk of bias in the studies and the overall certainty of the evidence using GRADE criteria. We measured treatment effects through analysing dichotomous outcomes (presence/absence of complications) and expressing them as odds ratios (OR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI). For failure in the subgroup of deep lesions, we used network meta-analysis to assess and rank the relative effectiveness of different interventions.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 27 studies with 3350 participants and 4195 teeth/lesions, which were conducted in 11 countries and published between 1977 and 2020. Twenty-four studies used a parallel-group design and three were split-mouth. Two studies included adults only, 20 included children/adolescents only and five included both. Ten studies evaluated permanent teeth, 16 evaluated primary teeth and one evaluated both. Three studies treated non-cavitated lesions; 12 treated cavitated, deep lesions, and 12 treated cavitated but not deep lesions or lesions of varying depth.  Seventeen studies compared conventional treatment (CR) with a less invasive treatment: SE (8), SW (4), two HT (2), sealing with sealant materials (4) and NRCC (1). Other comparisons were: SE versus HT (2); SE versus SW (4); SE versus sealing  with sealant materials (2); sealant materials versus no sealing (2).  Follow-up times varied from no follow-up (pulp exposure during treatment) to 120 months, the most common being 12 to 24 months. All studies were at overall high risk of bias. Effect of interventions Sealing using sealants versus other interventions for non-cavitated or cavitated but not deep lesions There was insufficient evidence of a difference between sealing with sealants and CR (OR 5.00, 95% CI 0.51 to 49.27; 1 study, 41 teeth, permanent teeth, cavitated), sealing versus SE (OR 3.11, 95% CI 0.11 to 85.52; 2 studies, 82 primary teeth, cavitated) or sealing versus no treatment (OR 0.05, 95% CI 0.00 to 2.71; 2 studies, 103 permanent teeth, non-cavitated), but we assessed all as very low-certainty evidence. HT, CR, SE, NRCC for cavitated, but not deep lesions in primary teeth The odds of failure may be higher for CR than HT (OR 8.35, 95% CI 3.73 to 18.68; 2 studies, 249 teeth; low-certainty evidence) and lower for HT than NRCC (OR 0.19, 95% CI 0.05 to 0.74; 1 study, 84 teeth, very low-certainty evidence). There was insufficient evidence of a difference between SE versus HT (OR 8.94, 95% CI 0.57 to 139.67; 2 studies, 586 teeth) or CR versus NRCC (OR 1.16, 95% CI 0.50 to 2.71; 1 study, 102 teeth), both very low-certainty evidence. CR, SE, SW for deep lesions The odds of failure were higher for CR than SW in permanent teeth (OR 2.06, 95% CI 1.34 to 3.17; 3 studies, 398 teeth; moderate-certainty evidence), but not primary teeth (OR 2.43, 95% CI 0.65 to 9.12; 1 study, 63 teeth; very low-certainty evidence). The odds of failure may be higher for CR than SE in permanent teeth (OR 11.32, 95% CI 1.97 to 65.02; 2 studies, 179 teeth) and primary teeth (OR 4.43, 95% CI 1.04 to 18.77; 4 studies, 265 teeth), both very low-certainty evidence. Notably, two studies compared CR versus SE in cavitated, but not deep lesions, with insufficient evidence of a difference in outcome (OR 0.62, 95% CI 0.21 to 1.88; 204 teeth; very low-certainty evidence). The odds of failure were higher for SW than SE in permanent teeth (OR 2.25, 95% CI 1.33 to 3.82; 3 studies, 371 teeth; moderate-certainty evidence), but not primary teeth (OR 2.05, 95% CI 0.49 to 8.62; 2 studies, 126 teeth; very low-certainty evidence). For deep lesions, a network meta-analysis showed the probability of failure to be greatest for CR compared with SE, SW and HT.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Compared with CR, there were lower numbers of failures with HT and SE in the primary dentition, and with SE and SW in the permanent dentition. Most studies showed high risk of bias and limited precision of estimates due to small sample size and typically limited numbers of failures, resulting in assessments of low or very low certainty of evidence for most comparisons.

Laboratory evaluation of the potential masking of color changes produced by silver diamine fluoride in primary molars

BACKGROUND

The importance of Silver diamine fluoride (SDF) as a minimally invasive and nonaerosolizing management during COVID-19 pandemic has highly increased. SDF is a caries-arresting agent that causes staining of tooth structure. Managing this discoloration will increase its acceptance in treating primary teeth. The main aim of this study was to quantify the color change associated with the application of SDF on extracted carious primary molars, the potential masking of this color change by potassium iodide (KI), composite (CMP) and glass ionomer cement (GI) and the effect of aging on this color masking effect.

METHODS

An in-vitro study in which 52 carious primary molars were collected, prepared, and distributed randomly into four groups equally as follows: Group A: SDF 38%; Group B: SDF 38% + KI; Group C: SDF 38% + CMP; Group D: SDF 38% + GI. Color changes were recorded for each sample at baseline, and after application of the tested materials. Moreover, all samples had undergone Suntest aging followed by a third color reading. CIELAB values L*, a*, b*, ΔL, Δa, and Δb were measured, ΔE was calculated, and data were analyzed using multivariate analysis of variance (MANOVA) and post-Hoc Scheffé test (p < 0.05).

RESULTS

MANOVA revealed the significant influence of the factor 'material'. SDF caused an obvious color change compared to the color of carious dentin. Regarding ΔL, the color change of groups C and D was not significant directly after application of the tested materials. After aging, it was significant among all groups, including groups C and D. In Δa there was a difference between SDF and groups B and C after application of the tested materials, and aging produced the same results. The color shifts of Δb of all tested groups varied significantly from one another. After aging, there was no difference between group D and either group A or B.

CONCLUSIONS

Treatment with SDF caused obvious discoloration of carious dentin. Directly after SDF application, all tested materials could effectively mask the color change associated with the application of SDF. CMP was the only material whose color masking effect was not completely reversed by aging.

When to intervene in the caries process? A Delphi consensus statement

Objectives To define an expert Delphi consensus on when to intervene in the caries process and existing carious lesions.Methods Non-systematic literature synthesis, expert Delphi consensus process and expert panel conference.Results Lesion activity, cavitation and cleansability determine intervention thresholds. Inactive lesions do not require treatment (in some cases, restorations may be placed for form, function, aesthetics); active lesions do. Non-cavitated carious lesions should be managed non- or micro-invasively, as should most cavitated lesions which are cleansable. Cavitated lesions which are not cleansable usually require minimally invasive management. In specific circumstances, mixed interventions may be applicable. Occlusally, cavitated lesions confined to enamel/non-cavitated lesions extending radiographically into deep dentine may be exceptions. Proximally, cavitation is hard to assess tactile-visually. Most lesions extending radiographically into the middle/inner third of dentine are assumed to be cavitated. Those restricted to the enamel are not cavitated. For lesions extending radiographically into the outer third of dentine, cavitation is unlikely. These lesions should be managed as if they were non-cavitated unless otherwise indicated. Individual decisions should consider factors modifying these thresholds.Conclusions Comprehensive diagnosis is the basis for systematic decision-making on when to intervene in the caries process and existing lesions.

Assessment of the Depth of Clinically Detected Approximal Caries Lesions Using Digital Imaging Fiber-Optic Transillumination in Comparison to Periapical Radiographs

Objectives

The aim of present prospective clinical trial was to assess the depth of clinically detected approximal caries lesions using digital imaging fiber-optic transillumination in comparison to periapical radiographs.

Material and Methods

One calibrated examiner diagnosed 31 approximal carious lesions in 10 patients with a mean age of 21.8 (SD 1.1) years. The lesions were assessed using digital imaging fiber-optic transillumination (DIFOTI) and digital periapical radiographs (PA). Depending on the depth of the lesions, scores for demineralisation in PA (R) and DIFOTI (F) images were given by two examiners: R0/F0 - no demineralisation, R1/F1 - demineralisation confined to the outer half of the enamel, R2/F2 - into the inner half of the enamel, 3/3 - along the amelodentinal junction, R3/F3 - into the outer half of dentine, R4/F4 - into the inner part of the dentine. Spearman's rank correlation coefficient and kappa were calculated.

Results

Spearman's rank correlation coefficient between DIFOTI and PA was 0.031 (P > 0.05), kappa was 0.077. In 26% of the cases, DIFOTI showed higher scores of demineralisation, relative to PA. In 36% of the cases, PA showed higher scores of demineralisation than DIFOTI. PA showed demineralisation into the outer and inner half of the dentine in 89% of the cases with underlying shadow and in 70% of the cases with opacities.

Conclusions

Digital imaging fibre optic transillumination and periapical radiographs produce evaluations of the depth of approximal caries lesions that do not match.

Best-practice prevention alone or with conventional or biological caries management for 3- to 7-year-olds: the FiCTION three-arm RCT

BACKGROUND

Historically, lack of evidence for effective management of decay in primary teeth has caused uncertainty, but there is emerging evidence to support alternative strategies to conventional fillings, which are minimally invasive and prevention orientated.

OBJECTIVES

The objectives were (1) to assess the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of three strategies for managing caries in primary teeth and (2) to assess quality of life, dental anxiety, the acceptability and experiences of children, parents and dental professionals, and caries development and/or progression.

DESIGN

This was a multicentre, three-arm parallel-group, participant-randomised controlled trial. Allocation concealment was achieved by use of a centralised web-based randomisation facility hosted by Newcastle Clinical Trials Unit.

SETTING

This trial was set in primary dental care in Scotland, England and Wales.

PARTICIPANTS

Participants were NHS patients aged 3-7 years who were at a high risk of tooth decay and had at least one primary molar tooth with decay into dentine, but no pain/sepsis.

INTERVENTIONS

Three interventions were employed: (1) conventional with best-practice prevention (local anaesthetic, carious tissue removal, filling placement), (2) biological with best-practice prevention (sealing-in decay, selective carious tissue removal and fissure sealants) and (3) best-practice prevention alone (dietary and toothbrushing advice, topical fluoride and fissure sealing of permanent teeth).

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

The clinical effectiveness outcomes were the proportion of children with at least one episode (incidence) and the number of episodes, for each child, of dental pain or dental sepsis or both over the follow-up period. The cost-effectiveness outcomes were the cost per incidence of, and cost per episode of, dental pain and/or dental sepsis avoided over the follow-up period.

RESULTS

A total of 72 dental practices were recruited and 1144 participants were randomised (conventional arm, n = 386; biological arm, n = 381; prevention alone arm, n = 377). Of these, 1058 were included in an intention-to-treat analysis (conventional arm, n = 352; biological arm, n = 352; prevention alone arm, n = 354). The median follow-up time was 33.8 months (interquartile range 23.8-36.7 months). The proportion of children with at least one episode of pain or sepsis or both was 42% (conventional arm), 40% (biological arm) and 45% (prevention alone arm). There was no evidence of a difference in incidence or episodes of pain/sepsis between arms. When comparing the biological arm with the conventional arm, the risk difference was -0.02 (97.5% confidence interval -0.10 to 0.06), which indicates, on average, a 2% reduced risk of dental pain and/or dental sepsis in the biological arm compared with the conventional arm. Comparing the prevention alone arm with the conventional arm, the risk difference was 0.04 (97.5% confidence interval -0.04 to 0.12), which indicates, on average, a 4% increased risk of dental pain and/or dental sepsis in the prevention alone arm compared with the conventional arm. Compared with the conventional arm, there was no evidence of a difference in episodes of pain/sepsis among children in the biological arm (incident rate ratio 0.95, 97.5% confidence interval 0.75 to 1.21, which indicates that there were slightly fewer episodes, on average, in the biological arm than the conventional arm) or in the prevention alone arm (incident rate ratio 1.18, 97.5% confidence interval 0.94 to 1.48, which indicates that there were slightly more episodes in the prevention alone arm than the conventional arm). Over the willingness-to-pay values considered, the probability of the biological treatment approach being considered cost-effective was approximately no higher than 60% to avoid an incidence of dental pain and/or dental sepsis and no higher than 70% to avoid an episode of pain/sepsis.

CONCLUSIONS

There was no evidence of an overall difference between the three treatment approaches for experience of, or number of episodes of, dental pain or dental sepsis or both over the follow-up period.

FUTURE WORK

Recommendations for future work include exploring barriers to the use of conventional techniques for carious lesion detection and diagnosis (e.g. radiographs) and developing and evaluating suitable techniques and strategies for use in young children in primary care.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN77044005.

FUNDING

This project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 24, No. 1. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.

Terminology of Dental Caries and Dental Caries Management: Consensus Report of a Workshop Organized by ORCA and Cariology Research Group of IADR

A 2-day workshop of ORCA and the IADR Cariology Research Group was organized to discuss and reach consensus on definitions of the most commonly used terms in cariology. The aims were to identify and to select the most commonly used terms of dental caries and dental caries management and to define them based on current concepts. Terms related to definition, diagnosis, risk assessment, and monitoring of dental caries were included. The Delphi process was used to establish terms to be considered using the nominal group method favored by consensus. Of 222 terms originally suggested by six cariologists from different countries, a total of 59 terms were reviewed after removing duplicates and unnecessary words. Sixteen experts in cariology took part in the process of reaching consensus about the definitions of the selected caries terms. Decisions were made following thorough "round table" discussions of each term and confirmed by secret electronic voting. Full agreement (100%) was reached on 17 terms, while the definitions of 6 terms were below the agreed 80% threshold of consensus. The suggested terminology is recommended for use in research, in public health, as well as in clinical practice.

When to intervene in the caries process? An expert Delphi consensus statement

OBJECTIVES

To define an expert Delphi consensus on when to intervene in the caries process and on existing carious lesions using non- or micro-invasive, invasive/restorative or mixed interventions.

METHODS

Non-systematic literature synthesis, expert Delphi consensus process and expert panel conference.

RESULTS

Carious lesion activity, cavitation and cleansability determine intervention thresholds. Inactive lesions do not require treatment (in some cases, restorations will be placed for reasons of form, function and aesthetics); active lesions do. Non-cavitated carious lesions should be managed non- or micro-invasively, as should most cavitated carious lesions which are cleansable. Cavitated lesions which are not cleansable usually require invasive/restorative management, to restore form, function and aesthetics. In specific circumstances, mixed interventions may be applicable. On occlusal surfaces, cavitated lesions confined to enamel and non-cavitated lesions radiographically extending deep into dentine (middle or inner dentine third, D2/3) may be exceptions to that rule. On proximal surfaces, cavitation is hard to assess visually or by using tactile methods. Hence, radiographic lesion depth is used to determine the likelihood of cavitation. Most lesions radiographically extending into the middle or inner third of the dentine (D2/3) can be assumed to be cavitated, while those restricted to the enamel (E1/2) are not cavitated. For lesions radiographically extending into the outer third of the dentine (D1), cavitation is unlikely, and these lesions should be managed as if they were non-cavitated unless otherwise indicated. Individual decisions should consider factors modifying these thresholds.

CONCLUSIONS

Comprehensive diagnostics are the basis for systematic decision-making on when to intervene in the caries process and on existing carious lesions.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

Carious lesion activity, cavitation and cleansability determine intervention thresholds. Invasive treatments should be applied restrictively and with these factors in mind.

How to Intervene in the Root Caries Process? Systematic Review and Meta-Analyses

The aim of this review as part of the preparation for a workshop organized by the European Federation of Conservative Dentistry (EFCD) in conjunction with the European Organisation for Caries Research (ORCA) was to systematically analyze available evidence of non-, micro- as well as invasive interventions for root caries lesions (RCLs). For each treatment strategy, a separate systematic review was either performed (micro-invasive and choice of restorative material) or updated (non-invasive and excavation technique) each of them following PRISMA guidelines, and if possible meta-analyses were performed. Besides the general advice to improve tooth brushing with fluoride toothpaste main findings for non-invasive interventions in RCLs, the use of dentifrices containing 5,000 ppm F- as well as professionally applied chlorhexidine varnish or silver diamine fluoride seemed to be more efficacious to arrest root caries compared to conventional fluoride toothpaste or placebo respectively. However, this conclusion is based only on a few randomized clinical trials. For micro-invasive treatments, only 2 studies focusing on sealants were available without clear conclusions. A recent review on the comparison of atraumatic restorative treatment compared with conventional treatment concluded that there is insufficient data to clearly rule out if any difference with regard to restoration longevity between both techniques exists. When restoring coventionally, composites performed better than resin-modified and glass ionomer cements. However, all materials showed rather high annual failure rates in the majority of the studies and evidence is based on a low number of prospective studies with a rather high risk of bias.

Tailored Dentistry: From "One Size Fits All" to Precision Dental Medicine?

Over the past 30 years and fueled by both a rapidly evolving understanding of dental diseases and technological advances in diagnostics and therapy, dentistry has been changing dramatically. Managing dental caries and carious lesions had, for nearly a century, encompassed only a small number of basic concepts that were applied to virtually all patients and lesions, namely, invasive removal of any carious tissue regardless of its activity or depth and its replacement with restorative materials (amalgams or crowns for most of the past) or tooth removal and prosthetic replacement. Grounded in a deeper understanding of the disease "caries," its management-aiming to control the causes of the disease, to slow down or alleviate existing disease, and, only as a last resort, to remove its symptoms using a bur or forceps-has become more complex and diverse. In parallel and at nearly unprecedented speed, our patients are changing, as mirrored by ongoing debates as to the demographic and, with it, the social future of most high-income countries. This article describes how these changes will have a profound future impact on how we practice dental medicine in the future. It will deduce, from both demographic and epidemiologic trends, why there is the need to apply not one but rather the whole range of existing evidence-based concepts in an individualized (personalized) manner, hence increasing the effectiveness and efficiency of dental management strategies, and also describe how these strategies should be tailored according not only to our patients (their age and risk profiles) but also to the specific tooth (or site or lesion).

Interventions for treating cavitated or dentine carious lesions

This is a protocol for a Cochrane Review (Intervention). The objectives are as follows:

To determine the clinical and cost‐effectiveness of interventions (non‐selective, selective or stepwise carious tissue removal, sealing of carious lesions using sealant materials or preformed metal crowns, or NRCC) to treat carious lesions conventionally considered to require restorations (cavitated or micro‐cavitated lesions, or occlusal lesions that are clinically non‐cavitated but clinically/radiographically extend into dentine) in primary or permanent teeth with vital (sensitive) pulps.

Cost-effectiveness of managing cavitated primary molar caries lesions: A randomized trial in Germany

OBJECTIVES

The Hall Technique (HT), Non-Restorative Cavity Control (NRCC) and conventional carious tissue removal and restoration (CR) are strategies for managing cavitated caries lesions in primary molars. A randomized controlled three-arm parallel group trial in a university clinic in Germany was used to measure the cost-effectiveness of these strategies.

METHODS

142 children (HT: 40; NRCC: 44; CR: 58) were followed over a mean 2.5 years. A German healthcare perspective was chosen. The primary outcome was estimated molar survival; secondary outcomes were not needing extraction, not having pain or needing endodontic treatment/extraction, or not needing any re-intervention at all. Initial, maintenance and endodontic/restorative/extraction re-treatment costs were derived from fee items of the statutory insurance. Cumulative cost-effectiveness and cost-effectiveness acceptability were estimated from bootstrapped samples.

RESULTS

HT molars survived longer (estimated mean; 95% CI: 29.7; 26.6-30.5 months) than NRCC (25.3; 21.2-28.7 months) and CR molars (24.1; 22.0-26.2 months). HT was also less costly (66; 62-71 Euro) than NRCC (296; 274-318 Euro) and CR (83; 73-92 Euro). HT was more cost-effective than NRCC and CR in >96% of samples, and had acceptable cost-effectiveness regardless of a payer's willingness-to-pay. This superior cost-effectiveness was confirmed for secondary health outcomes. Cost-advantages were even more pronounced when costs were calculated per year of tooth retention (mean annual costs were HT: 29, NRCC: 154, CR: 61 Euro).

CONCLUSIONS

HT was more cost-effective than CR or NRCC for managing cavitated caries lesions in primary molars, yielding better dental health outcomes at lower costs.

CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE

If choosing between these three strategies for managing cavitated caries lesions in primary molars, dentists should prefer HT over NRCC or CR. This would also save costs for the healthcare payer.

Nyvad Criteria for Caries Lesion Activity and Severity Assessment: A Validated Approach for Clinical Management and Research

The Nyvad classification is a visual-tactile caries classification system devised to enable the detection of the activity and severity of caries lesions with special focus on low-caries populations. The criteria behind the classification reflect the entire continuum of caries, ranging from clinically sound surfaces through noncavitated and microcavitated caries lesions in enamel, to frank cavitation into the dentin. Lesion activity at each severity stage is discriminated by differences in surface topography and lesion texture. The reliability of the Nyvad criteria is high to excellent when used by trained examiners in the primary and permanent dentitions. The Nyvad criteria have construct validity for lesion activity assessments because of their ability to reflect the well-known caries-controlling effect of fluoride. Predictive validity was demonstrated by showing that active noncavitated lesions are at higher risk of progressing to a cavity or filled state than do inactive noncavitated lesions. Lesion activity assessment performed successfully as a screening tool to identify individuals with a poor caries prognosis. Because of their predictive validity, the Nyvad criteria are superior to other current caries lesion descriptors for the detection of changes in the lesion activity status over time. The Nyvad criteria fulfill all the formal requirements for a robust caries lesion classification and are recommended for evidence-based caries management in clinical practice and in research.

Alternative Caries Management Options for Primary Molars: 2.5-Year Outcomes of a Randomised Clinical Trial

Less invasive caries management techniques for treating cavitated carious primary teeth, which involve the concept of caries control by managing the activity of the biofilm, are becoming common. This study aimed to compare the clinical efficacy (minor/major failures) and survival rates (successful cases without any failures) of 3 carious lesion treatment approaches, the Hall Technique (HT), non-restorative caries treatment (NRCT), and conventional restorations (CR), for the management of occlusoproximal caries lesions (ICDAS 3-5) in primary molars. Results at 2.5 years are presented. A total of 169 children (3- to 8-year-olds) were enrolled in this secondary care-based, 3-arm parallel-group, randomised controlled trial. Participants were allocated to: HT (n = 52; sealing caries with stainless-steel crowns without caries removal), NRCT (n = 52; opening up the cavity and applying fluoride varnish), CR (n = 65; control arm, complete caries removal and compomer restoration). Statistical analyses were: non-parametric Kruskal-Wallis analysis of variance, Mann-Whitney U test and Kaplan-Meier survival analyses. One hundred and forty-two participants (84%; HT = 40/52; NRCT = 44/52; CR = 58/65) had follow-up data of 1-33 months (mean = 26). Overall, 25 (HT = 2, NRCT = 9, CR = 14) of 142 participants (17.6%) presented with at least 1 minor failure (reversible pulpitis, caries progression, or secondary caries; p = 0.013, CI = 0.012-0.018; Mann-Whitney U test). Ten (HT = 1, NRCT = 4, CR = 5) of 142 participants (7.04%) experienced at least 1 major failure (irreversible pulpitis, abscess, unrestorable tooth; p = 0.043, CI = 0.034-0.045). Independent comparisons between 2 samples found that NRCT-CR had no statistically significant difference in failures (p > 0.05), but for CR-HT (p = 0.037, CI = 0.030-0.040) and for NRCT-HT (p = 0.011, CI = 0.010-0.016; Kruskal-Wallis test) significant differences were observed. Cumulative survival rates were HT = 92.5%, NRCT = 70.5%, and CR = 67.2% (p = 0.012). NRCT and CR outcomes were comparable. HT performed better than NRCT and CR for all outcomes. This study was funded by the Paediatric Dentistry Department, Greifswald University, Germany (Trial registration No. NCT01797458).