No abstract

No abstract

Minimal invasive approaches to managing caries, such as partial caries removal techniques, are showing increasing evidence of improved outcomes over the conventional complete caries removal. There is also increasing interest in techniques where no caries is removed. We present the 1-yr results of clinical efficacy for 3 caries management options for occlusoproximal cavitated lesions in primary molars: conventional restorations (CR; complete caries removal and compomer restoration), Hall technique (HT; no caries removal, sealing in with stainless steel crowns), and nonrestorative caries treatment (NRCT; no caries removal, opening up the cavity, teaching brushing and fluoride application). In sum, 169 children (3-8 yr old; mean, 5.56 ± 1.45 yr) were enrolled in this secondary care-based, 3-arm, parallelgroup, randomized clinical trial. Treatments were carried out by specialist pediatric dentists or postgraduate trainees. One lesion per child received CR, HT, or NRCT. Outcome measures were clinical failure rates, grouped as minor failure (restoration loss/ need for replacement, reversible pulpitis, caries progression, etc.) and major failure (irreversible pulpitis, abscess, etc.). There were 148 children (87.6%) with a minimum follow-up of 11 mo (mean, 12.23 ± 0.98 mo). Twenty teeth were recorded as having at least 1 minor failure: NRCT, n = 8 (5%); CR, n = 11 (7%); HT, n = 1 (1%) (p = .002, 95% CI = 0.001 to 0.003). Only the comparison between NRCT and CR showed no significant difference (p = .79, 95% CI = 0.78 to 0.80). Nine (6%) experienced at least 1 major failure: NRCT, n = 4 (2%); CR, n = 5 (3%); HT, n = 0 (0%) (p = .002, 95% CI = 0.001 to 0.003). Individual comparison of NRCT and CR showed no statistically significant difference in major failures (p = .75, 95% CI = 0.73 to 0.76). Success and failure rates were not significantly affected by pediatric dentists' level of experience (p = .13, 95% CI = 0.12 to 0.14). The HT was significantly more successful clinically than NRCT and CR after 1 yr, while pairwise analyses showed comparable results for treatment success between NRCT and CR (ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01797458).

Regenerative medicine-based approaches for caries treatment focus on biomimetic remineralization of initial carious lesions as a minimal invasive therapy. In vitro, self-assembling peptide P-4 enhances remineralization of early carious lesions. To investigate the safety and clinical efficacy of P-4 for treatment of initial caries, a randomized controlled single-blind study was conducted on children aged >5 y with visible active early caries on erupting permanent molars. Subjects were randomized to either the test group (P-4 + fluoride varnish) or control group (fluoride varnish alone). Caries were assessed at baseline and at 3 and 6 mo posttreatment per laser fluorescence, a visual analog scale, the International Caries Detection and Assessment System, and Nyvad caries activity criteria. Intention-to-treat analyses were performed, and safety and clinical feasibility of the treatment approaches were assessed. Compared with the control group, the test group showed clinically and statistically significant improvement in all outcomes at 3 and 6 mo. The laser fluorescence readings (odds ratio = 3.5, P = 0.015) and visual analog scale scores (odds ratio = 7.9, P < .0001) were significantly lower for the test group, and they showed regression in the International Caries Detection and Assessment System caries index (odds ratio = 5.1, P = 0.018) and conversion from active to inactive lesions according to Nyvad criteria (odds ratio = 12.2, P < 0.0001). No adverse events occurred. The biomimetic mineralization facilitated by P-4 in combination with fluoride application is a simple, safe, and effective noninvasive treatment for early carious lesions that is superior to the presently used gold standard of fluoride alone. By regenerating enamel tissue and preventing lesion progression, this novel approach could change clinical dental practice from a restorative to a therapeutic approach. This could avoid additional loss of healthy hard tissue during invasive restorative treatments, potentially enabling longer tooth life and thereby lowering long-term health costs ( ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02724592).

Dentists reported more negative behaviour in CR group. For all techniques, children's pain perception and dentist/parent acceptability were similar.

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).

It is ten years since the first paper on the Hall Technique was published in the British Dental Journal and almost 20 years since the technique first came to notice. Dr Norna Hall a (now retired) general dental practitioner from the north of Scotland had, for many years, been managing carious primary molar teeth by cementing preformed metal crowns over them, with no local anaesthesia, tooth preparation or carious tissue removal. This first report, a retrospective analysis of Dr Hall's treatments, caused controversy. How could simply sealing a carious lesion, with all the associated bacteria and decayed tissues, possibly be clinically successful? Since then, growing understanding that caries is essentially a biofilm driven disease rather than an infectious disease, explains why the Hall Technique, and other 'sealing in' carious lesion techniques, are successful. The intervening ten years has seen robust evidence from several randomised control trials that are either completed or underway. These have found the Hall Technique superior to comparator treatments, with success rates (no pain or infection) of 99% (UK study) and 100% (Germany) at one year, 98% and 93% over two years (UK and Germany) and 97% over five years (UK). The Hall Technique is now regarded as one of several biological management options for carious lesions in primary molars. This paper covers commonly asked questions about the Hall Technique and speculates on what lies ahead.

Background: The prevalence of proximal caries in primary molar teeth is high in many countries. Aims: (1) To study by means of a split-mouth design the 1- and 2.5-year efficacy of sealing proximal lesions vs. flossing instructions (control) on primary molar teeth. (2) To assess children’s behaviour and pain perception during the procedure. Methods: Ninety-one 4- to 6-year-old children from Bogotá, Colombia participated. Participants had to have at least two proximal lesions scored according to the following radiographic classification system: radiolucency (1) in enamel outer half, (2) restricted to enamel-dentine junction, or (3) restricted to dentine outer third. Baseline, 1- and 2.5-year follow-up bitewing radiographs were taken. Test and control lesions were randomly selected. After temporary separation test lesions were sealed (adhesive). Parents/caregivers received a flossing leaflet for their children. Progression of the lesions was assessed by means of independent reading of conventional bitewing radiographs. Results: One-year (n = 73) test vs. control lesion progression was 27.4 vs. 50.7%, respectively (p < 0.01, McNemar’s test), and 2.5-year (n = 56) test vs. control lesion progression was 46.4 vs. 71.4%, respectively (p < 0.01). The dropouts did not differ from those who remained in the study regarding relevant caries baseline data. More than 88% of the participants presented positive to definitively positive behaviour and very low or low pain intensity at both first and second appointments. Conclusion: The sealing technique was superior to flossing instructions both after 1 and 2.5 years of follow-up and the majority of the participants had no anxiety or pain during the treatment.