ObjectivesA multicentric randomized, 3-year prospective study was conducted to determine for how long Biodentine, a new biocompatible dentine substitute, can remain as a posterior restoration.Materials and methodsFirst, Biodentine was compared to the composite Z100®, to evaluate whether and for how long it could be used as a posterior restoration according to selected United States Public Health Service (USPHS)’ criteria (mean ± SD). Second, when abrasion occurred, Biodentine was evaluated as a dentine substitute combined with Z100®.ResultsA total of 397 cases were included. This interim analysis was conducted on 212 cases that were seen for the 1-year recall. On the day of restoration placement, both materials obtained good scores for material handling, anatomic form (0.12 ± 0.33), marginal adaptation (0.01 ± 0.10) and interproximal contact (0.11 ± 0.39). During the follow-up, both materials scored well in surface roughness (≤1) without secondary decay and post-operative pain. Biodentine kept acceptable surface properties regarding anatomic form score (≤1), marginal adaptation score (≤2) and interproximal contact score (≤1) for up to 6 months after placement. Resistance to marginal discoloration was superior with Biodentine compared to Z100®. When Biodentine was retained as a dentine substitute after pulp vitality control, it was covered systematically with the composite Z100®. This procedure yielded restorations that were clinically sound and symptom free.ConclusionsBiodentine is able to restore posterior teeth for up to 6 months. When subsequently covered with Z100®, it is a convenient, efficient and well tolerated dentine substitute.Clinical relevanceBiodentine as a dentine substitute can be used under a composite for posterior restorations.
While these results are encouraging, further study is needed to truly establish the efficacy of this mucositis prevention strategy. Future research needs to determine the effects of modification of laser parameters (e.g., wavelength, fluence, repetition rate of energy delivery, etc.) on the effectiveness of LLE laser to prevent OM.
Background. Oral mucositis is a common complication of bone marrow transplantation (BMT) conditioning therapy. Sequelae consist of increased risk for infection, moderate to severe pain, compromised oral function, and bleeding. This study investigated helium‐neon laser treatment for prevention of conditioning‐induced oral mucositis in BMT patients. Patterns and severity of mucositis for specific conditioning drug regimens also were analyzed.
Methods. Twenty patients received laser radiation to their oral mucosa, either left or right of midline. The contralateral side was sham‐treated and served as a control. Mucositis severity was scored independently by two modified versions of the Oral Mucositis Index Scale (OMI‐A and OMI‐B) and the Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) Oral Toxicity Scale; pain severity was scored by subjects on a visual analogue scale (VAS). Cumulative scores were analyzed for differences between the laser‐treated and sham‐treated sides.
Results. Oral mucositis and pain scores were significantly lower for the treated versus the untreated side by OMI‐A and B (P < 0.005) and VAS (P = 0.027) criteria, respectively. Ulcerative lesions occurred in all patients bilaterally; severity increased until Day +6, and lesions resolved by Day +21. Mucositis was more severe for patients conditioned with busulfan/carboplatin/thiotepa than for patients conditioned with busulfan/cyclophosphamide/etoposide.
Conclusions. Helium‐neon laser treatment was well‐tolerated and reduced the severity of conditioning‐induced oral mucositis in BMT patients.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.