No abstract

This systematic review aimed to describe and characterize internal tooth bleaching techniques, conventional (walking-bleach) and combined (inside–outside), referring to their efficacy. The research was conducted on the main databases: PubMed, Cochrane Library, EMBASE, and Web of Science. Only randomized controlled trials and cohort studies were considered, on humans of 18 years old or older. A Population, Intervention, Comparison, Outcome (PICO) question was designed to evaluate the scientific evidence. The quality of each randomized controlled trial and cohort study was evaluated using the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions and the Methodological Index for Non-Randomized Studies (ROBINS-I), respectively. The walking-bleach and the combined techniques were both effective at the end of the treatment, obtaining similar aesthetic results. Regardless of the technique used, internal tooth bleaching is an effective procedure, with good aesthetic results, in the treatment of non-vital teeth. The cervical barrier is a standard of care in internal bleaching techniques and should be used. Considering the similarity in the esthetic results obtained in both techniques, the concentrations used for both, and since the biocompatibility of the bleaching agent is more important than its efficiency or speed in obtaining results, the combined technique should be considered the method of choice rather than the walking-bleach technique.

Cavity disinfection becomes an important step before a dental restorative procedure. The disinfection can be obtained cleaning the dental cavity with antimicrobial agents before the use of adhesive systems. The aim of this study was to conduct a systematic review on the effect of different cavity disinfectants on restorations’ adhesion and clinical success. A search was carried out through the Cochrane Library, PubMed, and Web of Science. In vitro and in situ studies reporting results on dentin bond strength tests, and clinical studies published until August 2020, in English, Spanish and Portuguese were included. The methodological quality assessment of the clinical studies was carried out using the Revised Cochrane risk-of-bias tool. Chlorhexidine could preserve adhesion to dentin. EDTA and ethanol had positive results that should be further confirmed. Given the significant lack of scientific evidence, the use of lasers, fluoridated agents, sodium hypochlorite, or other products as cavity disinfectants should be avoided. Chlorhexidine is a safe option for cavity disinfection with adequate preservation of adhesion to dentin. Moreover, future researches should be focused on the efficacy of these disinfectants against cariogenic bacteria and their best application methods.

Objective: To analyze articles aimed at evaluating the association between diabetes, metabolic control, diabetes duration, and dental caries.Overview: A systematic search in PubMed, Cochrane Library, Embase, and Web of Science was conducted to retrieve papers in English, Portuguese, and Spanish, up to April 2019. The research strategy was constructed considering the "PECO" strategy.Only quantitative observational studies were analyzed. The risk of bias was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa Quality Assessment Scale. The meta-analyses were performed based on random-effects models using the statistical platform R. A total of 69 articles was included in the systematic review and 40 in the meta-analysis. Type

Dental caries is a disease of dental hard tissues, considered the most common non-communicable disease worldwide. Conventional treatments for caries removal are often associated with pain and fear, so different therapeutic approaches have been developed towards more conservative and pleasant treatments. This systematic review aimed to assess the efficacy and patient’s acceptance of alternative methods for caries removal compared to conventional methods. The Cochrane Library, Embase, Medline/Pubmed, Web of Science, and Clinical Trials databases were searched. Clinical trials of primary dental caries treated with alternative methods were included. The last search was performed on 5 August 2020. The Population, Intervention, Comparison, and Outcome (PICO) strategy was followed. Thirty-seven clinical trials were included, reporting caries removal using alternative (chemomechanical—Brix 3000, Carie-care, Carisolv and Papacarie, laser—Er:YAG (Erbium-doped Yttrium Aluminium Garnet) and Er,Cr:YSGG (Erbium, Chromium-doped Yttrium, Scandium, Gallium and Garnet), and a system combining air and sono-abrasion—Vector® System) and conventional methods. Alternative methods tended to prolong treatment time and lessen anesthesia need. All treatments were effective in reducing cariogenic flora, and the restoration’s performance did not differ significantly. Chemomechanical solutions seemed to be the best option towards minimally invasive treatments, with good control during application and action and good treatment experiences for patients. Papacarie was demonstrated to be an effective method for caries removal with less pain, and superior acceptance by patients when compared to conventional treatments.

(1) Background: Bisphenol A (BPA) based dental resins are commonly used in preventive and reparative dentistry. Since some monomers may remain unpolymerized in the application of dental resin, they dissolve in the saliva. (2) Methods: The literature search was carried out in Pubmed, Cochrane and Embase databases. Randomized controlled trials, cohort studies and case-control studies that evaluated BPA levels in human urine, saliva and/or blood were included. (3) Results: The initial search had 5111 results. A total of 20 studies were included in the systematic review. Most studies showed an increase of the levels of bisphenol A 1 h after treatments with composite resins and dental sealants. One week after treatments the levels were decreased. (4) Conclusions: Some clinical precautions should be taken to decrease the release of BPA, namely the use of rubber dam, the immediate polishing of all resins used, or the use of glycerin gel to avoid non-polymerization of the last resin layer, and mouthwash after treatment. Another preventive measure in addition to the above-mentioned is the use of the smallest possible number of restorations or sealants, a maximum of four per appointment. These measures are even more important in children, adolescents and pregnant women.

The surface smoothness of composite restorations affects not only their esthetic appearance but also other properties. Thus, rough surfaces can lead to staining, plaque accumulation, gingival irritation, recurrent caries, abrasiveness, wear kinetics, and tactile perception by the patient. The aim of this study was to evaluate the influence of irrigation during the finishing and polishing of composite resin restorations. A systematic search of the PubMed, Cochrane Library, EMBASE, Web of Science, and Clinical Trials databases was conducted. Papers published up to 11 February 2021 were considered. The quality of each study was assessed using the modified Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials checklist for reporting in vitro studies on dental materials. No clinical studies were identified. Six in vitro studies were included, reporting changes in physical and esthetic properties. After performing a methodological quality assessment of the studies, some limitations were identified, the main limitation being the heterogeneous methodology across studies. The evidence resulting from this systematic review did not favor either wet or dry finishing/polishing procedures. There is a clear need for well-designed studies focusing on the comparison of dry/wet finishing/polishing with standard protocols to evaluate the differences among different materials and methods.

Some authors have been proposing the use of cavity disinfectants in order to reduce, or even eliminate, the effect of the microorganisms present in a dental cavity before a restoration is placed. The aim of this study was to evaluate the effect of different cavity disinfectants on bond strength and clinical success of composite and glass ionomer restorations on primary teeth. The research was conducted using Cochrane Library, PubMed/MEDLINE, SCOPUS, and Web of Science for articles published up to February 2021. The search was performed according to the PICO strategy. The evaluation of the methodological quality of each in vitro study was assessed using the CONSORT checklist for reporting in vitro studies on dental materials. Sixteen in vitro studies and one in situ study fulfilled the inclusion criteria and were analyzed. Chlorhexidine was the most studied cavity disinfectant, and its use does not compromise dentin bonding. Sodium hypochlorite is a promising alternative, but more research on its use is required to clearly state that it can safely be used as a cavity disinfectant for primary teeth. Although other disinfectants were studied, there is a low-level evidence attesting their effects on adhesion, therefore their use should be avoided.