ABSTRACT Objective: To compare the root canal preparation of primary teeth with reciprocating and rotary NiTi instruments. Material and Methods: Electronic databases (PubMed/MEDLINE, Web of Science, TRIP, Lilacs, Embase, and Scopus) were systematically searched until October 2020. In vitro studies comparing the cleaning ability, debris extrusion, file deformation, or working time of rotary and reciprocating NiTi instruments in primary teeth were evaluated. Two reviewers independently selected the studies, extracted the data, and assessed the risk of bias. Meta-analyses were conducted using a random-effects model to calculate pooled mean differences between reciprocating and rotary NiTi instruments considering the outcomes: working time (minutes) and debris extrusion (milligrams). Statistical analyses were performed using RevMan 5.3 at a significance level of 5%. Results: From 4,417 potentially relevant studies, 10 were included in the systematic review, and 8 considered in the meta-analyses. There was no significant difference between reciprocating and rotary NiTi instruments considering debris extrusion [3 data sets; effect size: -0.11 (-0.25-0.04); p=0.15] and working time [6 data sets; effect size: -0.37 (-0.98-0.24); p=0.24]. The heterogeneity found was moderate to high. The risk of bias was low in most studies (50.0% of all items across studies). Conclusion: There is no scientific evidence showing superiority of reciprocating or rotary NiTi instruments used for root canal preparation in primary teeth.

Abstract Objective: To investigate the association between child’s daytime caring person and risk for higher early childhood caries (ECC) experience. Material and Methods: The sample consisted of all clinical records (census) of children (0-3 years old) attended in a public dental clinic, which contained information about caries experience and child’s daytime caring person (mother, grandmother or others). Caries experience was dichotomized as dmft ≤ 2 or dmft >2. Data were analyzed by the chi-square (α = 0.05). Binary logistic regression models were built. Results: From a total of 310 children, 19% of children had the grandmother as daytime caring person. There was no association between child’s daytime caring person and caries experience (p=0.32). Logistic regression analysis showed that low daytime caregiver schooling (OR: 5.76 95%CI 1.18-28.18; p=0.02) and child’s age (OR: 1.14 95% CI 1.09-1.19; p=0.00) were risk factors, and breastfeeding duration (> 9 months - OR: 0.38 95% CI 0.21-0.68; p=0.00), no nocturnal feeding (OR: 0.50 95% CI 0.27-0.91; p=0.02), and absence of sugar consumption between main meals (OR: 0.50 95% CI 0.28-0.89; p=0.02) were protection factors for ECC. Conclusion: A higher caries experience in early childhood is not associated to child’s daytime caring person. On the other hand, the higher caries experience is associated with low caregiver schooling and older children.

Abstract The aim of this study was to investigate the influence of shortening of etching time for dentin on the restoration survival after selective carious tissue removal in primary molars. This two-arm randomized clinical trial included sixty-two subjects (5–8 year-old) and 100 primary molars presenting moderate dentin carious lesions on occlusal surface. The sample was randomly assigned into groups previously to adhesive application (Adper Single Bond 2; 3M ESPE): etching time recommended by manufacturer (15 s) or reduced (7 s). Resin composite (Filtek Bulk Fill Posterior Restorative; 3M ESPE) was inserted in a single increment for all restorations. Restorations were evaluated at 1, 6, 12, and 18 months using FDI criteria. Survival estimates for restorations’ longevity were evaluated with Kaplan-Meier method. Multivariate Cox regression analysis with shared frailty was used to assess the factors associated with failures (p < 0.05). The etching time did not influence the restorations’ survival (HR 0.35 95%CI 0.11–1.12; p = 0.06). Mean estimated time of survival was 17.6 months (95%CI, 17.2–17.9). The survival rates at the 18-month follow-up were 75.7% and 91.4% (AFR: 16.9% and 5.7%) when primary dentin was acid etched for 15 and 7 s, respectively (log-rank p = 0.06). In conclusion, the etching time for dentin did not influence the clinical behavior of adhesives restorations. However, there was a tendency for better clinical outcome when using etching time of 7 s.

Abstract This study aimed to compare the longevity of different conventional restorative materials placed in posterior primary teeth. This systematic review was conducted following the PRISMA statement and registered in PROSPERO (CRD42016035775). A comprehensive electronic search without date or language restrictions was performed in PubMed/MEDLINE, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Scopus, Turning Research Into Practice (TRIP) and Clinical Trials databases up to January 2017, selecting randomized clinical trials that assessed the longevity of at least two different conventional restorative materials performed in primary molars. Seventeen studies were included in this systematic review. Pairwise and network meta-analyses were performed and relative risks and 95% confidence intervals (CI) calculated. Two reviewers independently selected the studies, extracted the data, and assessed the risk of bias. Restorations of primary molars with conventional glass ionomer cement showed increased risk of failure than compomer, resin-modified glass ionomer cement, amalgam, and composite resin. Risk of bias was low in most studies (45.38% of all items across studies). Pediatric dentists should avoid conventional glass ionomer cement for restoring primary molars.

Abstract: This study aimed to systematically review the literature to address the question regarding the influence of different materials in the clinical and radiographic success of indirect pulp treatment in primary teeth. A literature search was carried out for articles published prior to January 2017 in PubMed/MEDLINE, CENTRAL, Scopus, TRIP and ClinicalTrials databases; relevant articles included randomized clinical trials that compared materials used for indirect pulp treatment in primary teeth. Two reviewers independently selected the studies and extracted the data. The effects of each material on the outcome (clinical and radiographic failures) were analyzed using a mixed treatment comparisons meta-analysis. The ranking of treatments according to their probability of being the best choice was also calculated. From 1,088 potentially eligible studies, 11 were selected for full-text analysis, and 4 were included in the meta-analysis. In all papers, calcium hydroxide liner was used as the control group versus an adhesive system, resin-modified glass ionomer cement or placebo. The follow-up period ranged from 24 to 48 months, with dropout rates of 0-25.7%. The material type did not significantly affect the risk of failure of the indirect pulp treatment. However, calcium hydroxide presented a higher probability of failure. In conclusion, there is no scientific evidence showing the superiority of any material used for indirect pulp treatment in primary teeth.