Abstract Data on clinical management options for sleep bruxism in the primary dentition are inconclusive. This umbrella review aimed to synthesize the available evidence from systematic reviews (SRs) on the associated factors and treatment approaches for clinical management of sleep bruxism in children. A search was conducted in the MEDLINE/PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, and OpenGrey databases up to March 2022. SRs published on sleep bruxism in children containing data on associated factors or treatment outcomes were included. The AMSTAR-2 tool was used to assess the methodological quality of SRs. The search identified 444 articles, of which six were included. Sleep conditions, respiratory changes, personality traits, and psychosocial factors were the associated factors commonly identified. Treatments included psychological and pharmacological therapies, occlusal devices, physical therapy, and surgical therapy. All SRs included presented a high risk of bias. Overlapping of the included studies was considered very high. The best evidence available to date for the management of sleep bruxism in children is based on associated factors, with sleep duration and conditions, respiratory changes, as well as personality traits and psychosocial factors being the most important factors commonly reported by studies. However, there is currently insufficient evidence to make recommendations for specific treatment options. inconclusive (SRs MEDLINEPubMed MEDLINE PubMed MEDLINE/PubMed Science Embase 2022 AMSTAR2 AMSTAR 2 AMSTAR- 44 articles conditions changes therapies devices therapy bias However 202 4 20

Abstract: There is a lack of evidence about the best approach for cavitated caries lesions with the possibility of pulpal involvement in primary teeth. Thus, the present authors aimed to verify the best treatment for deep caries lesions with or without pulp involvement in primary teeth. The search was conducted in MEDLINE/Pubmed and Web of Science databases until May 2020. Studies that compared techniques to manage deep caries lesions with at least 12 months of follow-up were included. The risk of bias was evaluated using the RoB tool. Network meta-analysis and pairwise meta-analyses were conducted considering the treatment clinical success as an outcome, according to the pulp health condition. From 491 potentially eligible studies, 9 were included. For deep caries lesions with pulp vitality, the Hall Technique presented the highest probability of success (78%). In the event of accidental pulp exposure, pulpectomy presented a 76% chance of providing the best clinical results. For pulp necrosis, no difference was observed between a pulpectomy and non-instrumented endodontic treatment (RR = 0.69; 95%CI: 0.21–2.33) Thus, it was concluded that the Hall Technique may be a better option for deep caries lesions with pulp vitality. In cases of accidental pulp exposure of vital teeth during caries removal, a pulpectomy may be considered the best option. However, there are insufficient studies to build up evidence about the best treatment option when irreversible pulpitis or pulp necrosis is present.