No abstract

No abstract

No abstract

Background/Aims Traumatic dental injuries are one of the most prevalent diseases globally, impacting people of different ages and socio‐economic statuses. As disease prevention is preferable to management, understanding when an individual's overjet is prone to dental trauma helps identify at‐risk patients, so to institute preventive strategies. The aim of this study was to identify the different overjet sizes that present an increased risk for developing dental trauma across different ages and dentition stages. Methods The title and protocol were registered and published a priori with the Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) and PROSPERO (CRD42017060907) and followed the JBI methodology of systematic reviews of association (etiology). A three‐step search strategy was performed, including electronic searches of gray literature and four databases. Studies of healthy human participants of any age and in any dental dentition stage were considered for inclusion. Only high methodological quality studies with low risk of bias were included. Where possible, meta‐analyses were performed using the random‐effects model, supplemented with the fixed‐effects model in situations where statistical heterogeneity was ≤50%, assessed using the I2 statistic. Results The study identified 3718 articles, 41 were included. An increased overjet was significantly associated with higher odds of developing trauma in all dentition stages and age groups. Children 0‐6 years with an overjet ≥3mm have an odds of 3.37 (95%CI, 1.36‐8.38, P = 0.009) for trauma. Children in the mixed and secondary dentition with an overjet >5mm have an odds of 2.43 (95%CI, 1.34‐4.42, P = 0.004). Twelve‐year‐old children with an overjet >5mm have an odds of 1.81 (95%CI, 1.44‐2.27, P < 0.0001). Conclusions The results confirm the association between increased overjet and dental trauma. A child in the primary dentition could be considered as having an overjet at risk for trauma when it is ≥3mm. In the early secondary dentition, the threshold for trauma is an overjet ≥5mm.

Animal testing is crucial in situations when research on humans is not allowed because of unknown health risks and ethical concerns. The current project aims to develop reporting guidelines exclusively for animal studies in Endodontology, using an established consensus‐based methodology. The guidelines have been named: Preferred Reporting Items for Animal Studies in Endodontology (PRIASE) 2021. Nine individuals (PD, VN, AK, PM, MN, JF, EP, JJ and SJ), including the project leaders (PD, VN) formed a steering committee. The steering committee developed a novel checklist by adapting and integrating their animal testing and peer review experience with the Animals in Research: Reporting In Vivo Experiments (ARRIVE) guidelines and also the Clinical and Laboratory Images in Publications (CLIP) principles. A PRIASE Delphi Group (PDG) and PRIASE Online Meeting Group (POMG) were also formed. Thirty‐one PDG members participated in the online Delphi process and achieved consensus on the checklist items and flowchart that were used to formulate the PRIASE guidelines. The novel PRIASE 2021 guidelines were discussed with the POMG on 9 September 2020 via a Zoom online video call attended by 21 individuals from across the globe and seven steering committee members. Following the discussions, the guidelines were modified and then piloted by several authors whilst writing a manuscript involving research on animals. The PRIASE 2021 guidelines are a checklist consisting of 11 domains and 43 individual items together with a flowchart. The PRIASE 2021 guidelines are focused on improving the methodological principles, reproducibility and quality of animal studies in order to enhance their reliability as well as repeatability to estimate the effects of endodontic treatments and usefulness for guiding future clinical studies on humans.

Root perforation results in the communication between root canal walls and periodontal space (external tooth surface). It is commonly caused by an operative procedural accident or pathological alteration (such as extensive dental caries, and external or internal inflammatory root resorption). Different factors may predispose to this communication, such as the presence of pulp stones, calcification, resorptions, tooth malposition (unusual inclination in the arch, tipping or rotation), an extra-coronal restoration or intracanal posts. The diagnosis of dental pulp and/or periapical tissue previous to root perforation is an important predictor of prognosis (including such issues as clinically healthy pulp, inflamed or infected pulp, primary or secondary infection, and presence or absence of intracanal post). Clinical and imaging exams are necessary to identify root perforation. Cone-beam computed tomography constitutes an important resource for the diagnosis and prognosis of this clinical condition. Clinical factors influencing the prognosis and healing of root perforations include its treatment timeline, extent and location. A small root perforation, sealed immediately and apical to the crest bone and epithelial attachment, presents with a better prognosis. The three most widely recommended materials to seal root perforations have been calcium hydroxide, mineral trioxide aggregate and calcium silicate cements. This review aimed to discuss contemporary therapeutic alternatives to treat root canal perforations. Accordingly, the essential aspects for repairing this deleterious tissue injury will be addressed, including its diagnosis, prognosis, and a discussion about the materials actually suggested to seal root canal perforation.

No abstract

No abstract