Management of deep caries lesions with or without pulp involvement in primary teeth: a systematic review and network meta-analysis

Success rate of Hall Technique for restoring carious primary molars - systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVES

The overall pooled success rate of the Hall Technique (HT) in various types of studies has not been investigated. The present study aims to evaluate the success rate of HT to restore carious primary molars.

METHODS

A systematic search was carried out in the MEDLINE/PubMed, Excerpta Medica Database (EMBASE), Scopus, Web of Science, and LIVIVO electronic databases, as well as the ProQuest database for grey literature review. A search was carried out up to September 2023 for studies meeting the eligibility criteria: Randomised Clinical Trials (RCTs) and Non-Randomised Studies of Interventions (NRSIs); children with primary molars treated using HT; and reporting success for at least 1-month post-treatment. Single-arm meta-analysis assessed the pooled proportion (95% CI) of HT success rates. Risk of bias and certainty of evidence using the GRADE approach were assessed.

RESULTS

Searching identified 665 studies, with 25 (15 RCTs and 10 NRSIs) meeting the eligibility criteria. In meta-analyses of RCTs, the pooled proportion success rate was 98% (95% CI: 97-99%) at 12-month follow-up. For NRSIs, the pooled proportion success rate was 95% (95% CI: 91-100%) up to 89 months.

CONCLUSIONS

HT presents a high success rate, even though the primary studies had "low" to "high" risk of bias and demonstrated "moderate" to "low" certainty of evidence. One of the main reasons for downgrading was related to blinding, which was generally unfeasible due to visibly different restorative materials. The systematic review protocol was registered in PROSPERO (ID: CRD42021204415).

Association between lesion depth and placement technique with failures requiring extraction of preformed metal crowns in primary molars. A retrospective study

PURPOSE

The aim of the present study was to evaluate the factors associated with failure requiring extraction after placement of preformed metal crowns (PMCs) in primary molars. Radiographic caries depth at baseline (initial/moderate and severe) and placement technique (Conventional and Hall technique) and other patient-related variables were analysed.

METHODS

Clinical and radiographic records from children aged 2-10 years who had at least one primary molar treated with PMCs between 2011 and 2019 were evaluated. Chi-square test, Fisher exact tests and logistic regression analysis (α = 5%) were performed to verify the relationship between the primary outcome and categorical variables (caries depth, restorative teachnique, jaw, tooth type and gender).

RESULTS

A total of 244 teeth treated in 165 children were included in the analysis. A total of 18 failures were observed (7.4%), of which 17 were in deep caries lesions and in which 15 had the PMC placed according to the conventional technique. Both caries lesion depth and restorative technique were associated with treatment failure (p < 0.05).

CONCLUSION

Taking into account the limitations of this retrospective study, treatment failures requiring extraction occurred more often in deep caries lesions when treated with preformed metal crowns (PMCs) following the conventional technique when compared to the Hall Technique.

Dental Decision-Making in Pediatric Dentistry: A Cross-Sectional Case-Based Questionnaire Among Dentists in Germany

Background and Objectives: The most recent guidelines and recommendations regarding treatments of dental caries in children are shifting towards evidence-based minimal or non-invasive approaches aiming to preserve the vitality of teeth and potentially reduce the need for dental general anesthesia. This study investigated the treatment recommendations of dentists actively practicing pediatric dentistry in Germany regarding different patient cases with caries in primary teeth. Materials and Methods: The questionnaire was distributed on paper or online to pediatric dentists and general dentists practicing pediatric dentistry. Five cases of children with dental treatment needs representing a variety of clinical situations were selected for the questionnaire. Considering four different scenarios regarding pain symptoms (yes/no) and cooperation level (good/low) for each case resulted in 20 questions, where the preferred treatment option could be chosen out of 21 options ranging from observation only to extraction with/without different sedation techniques. The answers were categorized into three categories for each case and scenario according to guidelines, recent scientific evidence, and recommendations (recommended, acceptable, or not recommended/contraindicated). Results: In total, 222 participants responded to the survey (161 female; 72.5%). In 55.2% of the total 4440 answers, the participants chose a "recommended" treatment option, in 16.4% "acceptable", but in 28.4%, a "not recommended" treatment, which ranged for the five cases between 18.7 and 36.1%. While pain and low cooperation levels led to more invasive and justified treatment choices (only 26.3% "not recommended"), less severe scenarios resulted more often in "not recommended" options (pain with good cooperation: 31.0%; or low cooperation without pain: 32.6%). The dentist's age, experience, and educational background did not significantly correlate to choosing "not recommended" treatment options. Conclusions: A child's pain and cooperation level greatly impact the treatment decisions made by dentists, with a risk of too invasive treatment options in low-severity cases. Substantial disparities in treatment recommendations for caries in primary teeth persist among dental practitioners regardless of their age, experience, and educational background.

Clinical effectiveness of restorative materials for the restoration of carious lesions in pulp treated primary teeth: a systematic review

Purpose

To systematically review the clinical performance of restorative materials after pulp therapy of carious primary teeth. It is part 2 of a systematic review on the clinical effectiveness of restorative materials for the management of carious primary teeth supporting the European Academy of Paediatric Dentistry (EAPD) guideline development.

Methods

Four electronic databases were systematically searched up to December 28th, 2020. Randomised controlled clinical trials (RCTs) on restorative materials for the restoration of carious primary teeth after pulp therapy were included. Failure rate, annual failure rate (AFR) and reasons for failure were recorded. Studies were sorted by restorative materials. The Cochrane Risk of bias tool for randomised trials (RoB 2.0) was used for quality assessment.

Results

After identification of 1685 articles and screening of 41 papers from EAPD review group 1, 5 RCTs were included. Restored primary molars with pulpotomy presented the following AFRs: composite resin (CR) 0%, preformed metal crowns (PMCs) 2.4–2.5%, resin-modified glass-ionomer cement combined with CR 3.8%, compomer 8.9%, and amalgam 14.3%. Maxillary primary incisors receiving pulpectomy exhibited AFRs of 0–2.3% for composite strip crowns (CSCs) depending on the post chosen. Reasons for failure were secondary caries, poor marginal adaptation, loss of retention and fracture of restoration. All studies were classified as high risk of bias. Meta-analyses were not feasible given the clinical/methodological heterogeneity amongst studies.

Conclusion

Considering any limitations of this review, CR and PMCs can be recommended for primary molars after pulpotomy, and CSCs for primary incisors receiving pulpectomy. However, a need for further well-designed RCTs was observed.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s40368-022-00744-4.

Methodological assessment and overall confidence in the results of systematic reviews with network meta-analyses in Endodontics

AIM

The aims of the study were to assess the methodological quality of systematic reviews with network meta-analyses (NMAs) in Endodontics using the "A MeaSurement Tool to Assess systematic Reviews" (AMSTAR 2) tool, and to evaluate the overall confidence in the results of the individual reviews included in the analysis.

METHODOLOGY

Systematic reviews with NMAs within the specialty of Endodontics published in English were identified from the PubMed, EbBSCOhost and SCOPUS databases from inception to July 2021. Two reviewers were involved independently in the selection of the reviews, data extraction, methodological quality assessment and overall confidence rating. Disagreements were resolved by discussion between the reviewers to achieve consensus; if disagreements persisted, a third reviewer made the final decision. The methodological quality of the included NMAs was appraised using the AMSTAR 2 checklist, which contains 16 items. The reviewers scored each item - 'Yes' - when the item was fully addressed, 'Partial Yes' - when the item was not fully addressed, or 'No' - when the item was not addressed. The overall confidence in the results of each review was classified as 'High', 'Moderate', 'Low' or 'Critically low' based on the criteria reported by the AMSTAR 2 developers.

RESULTS

Twelve systematic reviews with NMAs were included. All the NMAs adequately reported Item 1 ("Did the research questions and inclusion criteria for the review include the components of PICO?"), Item 8 ("Did the review authors describe the included studies in adequate detail?"), Item 9 ("Did the review authors use a satisfactory technique for assessing the risk of bias (RoB) in individual studies that were included in the review?") and Item 16 ("Did the review authors report any potential sources of conflict of interest, including any funding they received for conducting the review?") , whereas only one NMA reported Item 10 adequately ("Did the review authors report on the sources of funding for the studies included in the review?"). The overall confidence in the results of eight reviews was categorised as "Critically low", one review was "Low", two reviews were "Moderate" and one review was "High".

CONCLUSION

The overall confidence in the results for the majority of systematic reviews with NMAs in Endodontics was judged to be 'Critically low' as their methodological quality was below the necessary standard. AMSTAR 2 and PRISMA for NMA guidelines are available to guide authors to produce high quality systematic reviews with NMAs and for Editors and peer-reviewers when assessing submissions to journals.

Vital and Nonvital Pulp Therapy in Primary Dentition: An Umbrella Review

Dental caries is the most common non-communicable disease in children with significant aesthetic, functional, and quality of life deterioration. Depending on the depth, two approaches may be considered in primary dentition: vital pulp therapy (VPT) or non-vital therapy (NPT). This umbrella review aimed to critically assess the available systematic reviews (SRs) on VPT and NPT. An electronic database search was conducted (PubMed, Embase, Scopus, Cochrane, Web of Science, and LILACS) until June 2021. The Risk of Bias (RoB) of SRs was analyzed using the Measurement Tool to Assess SRs criteria 2 (AMSTAR2). From 272 entries, 33 SRs were included. Regarding the methodological quality, three studies were critically low, nine low, seventeen moderate, and six were rated as high quality. The quality of evidence produced by the available SRs was moderate. Future high standard SRs and well-designed clinical trials are warranted to better elucidate the clinical protocols and outcomes of VPT and NPT.