Tridimensional Evaluation of the Interfacial Gap in Deep Cervical Margin Restorations: A Micro-CT Study.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Using a material that optimizes marginal seal when using a margin elevation technique to manage deep class II cavities should enhance clinical outcomes. SUMMARY: Objectives: The purpose of this laboratory study was to perform a tridimensional interfacial gap evaluation of class II cavities with enamel and dentin cervical margins, before and after cyclic fatigue, restored with different nanohybrid resin composites.Methods and Materials: Standardized class II cavities were performed on 48 intact maxillary premolars, placing the mesial cervical margin 1 mm above the cement-enamel junction (CEJ) and the distal cervical margin 1 mm below the CEJ. Specimens were treated with two-step self-etch adhesive (Clearfil SE Bond2) and divided into six groups according to the restoration technique. Microcomputed Tomography imaging was executed before and after 1,000,000 cycles of chewing simulation at 50 N. Tridimensional interfacial gaps, expressed as cubic millimeters, were analyzed through a standardized software flowchart (Mimics). Data were analyzed with a two-way analysis of variance and Tukey post hoc tests (α=0.05).Results: Restoration technique (p=0.001) and chewing simulation (p=0.00001) significantly influenced interfacial gap on dentin but not on enamel. The post hoc test showed that, on dentin margins, flowable resins had a lower gap at baseline but a higher gap after chewing simulation, especially when a 2-mm-thick layer was applied, compared with nanohybrid and bulk-fill composites.Conclusions: Based on the obtained results, no differences in interfacial gap volume were found on enamel margins. On dentin margins, flowable resins showed better marginal seal at baseline, but they seem to be more prone to interfacial degradation during chewing simulation than traditional composites.

Postoperative quality of life following single-visit root canal treatment performed by rotary or reciprocating instrumentation: a randomized clinical trial.

AIM: To compare the impact of rotary and reciprocating instrumentation on postoperative quality of life (POQoL) after single-visit primary root canal treatment. METHODOLOGY: A randomized controlled clinical trial was designed and carried out in a University endodontic practice in northern Italy. Healthy subjects with asymptomatic irreversible pulpitis, symptomatic irreversible pulpitis or pulp necrosis with or without apical periodontitis (symptomatic or asymptomatic) scheduled for primary root canal treatment were enrolled. Single-visit root canal treatment was performed with ProTaper™ S1-S2-F1-F2 (rotary group, n = 23) and WaveOne™ Primary (reciprocating group, n = 24). Irrigation was performed with 5% NaOCl and 10% EDTA. Root canal filling was performed with the continuous-wave technique and ZOE sealer. POQoL indicators were evaluated for 7 days post-treatment. The variation of each indicator over time was compared using anova for repeated measures (P < 0.05). The impact of each variable on POQoL was analysed with a multivariate logistic regression model (P < 0.05). RESULTS: Pain curves demonstrated a more favourable time-trend in the rotary group (mean, P = 0.077; maximum, P = 0.015). Difficulty in eating (P = 0.017), in performing daily activities (P = 0.023), in sleeping (P = 0.021) and in social relations (P = 0.077), was more evident in the reciprocating group. Patients' perception of the impact of treatment on POQoL was more favourable in the rotary group (P = 0.006). Multirooted tooth type and pre-existing periradicular inflammation were associated with a decrease in POQoL. CONCLUSION: Reciprocating instrumentation affected POQoL to a greater extent than rotary instrumentation.