Evaluation of silver-modified atraumatic restorative technique versus conventional pulp therapy in asymptomatic deep carious lesion of primary molars - A comparative prospective clinical study.

Background: Lately, a paradigm shift from radical to conservative approach has popularized the selective caries removal over complete excavation in deep caries. Indirect pulp therapy over pulpotomy is being preferred due to risk of questionable pulp vitality in carious exposure of pulp. Silver diamine fluoride can be a useful tool for noninvasive caries management due to its antimicrobial and remineralization properties. Aim: The study aims to evaluate the success of minimum intervention approach using silver-modified atraumatic restorative technique (SMART) as indirect pulp treatment compared to conventional vital pulp therapy in symptomless deep carious lesions of primary molars. Materials and Methods: In this comparative, prospective, double-blinded, clinical interventional study, 60 asymptomatic primary molar teeth with international caries detection and assessment system score 4-6 were selected in children aged 4-8 years and were randomly allocated into SMART and conventional groups. The success of the treatment approach was assessed using clinical and radiographic criteria at baseline, 3, 6, and 12 months interval. Results: Data were analyzed using Pearson Chi-Square test at a significance level of 0.05. Conventional group showed 100% and SMART observed 96.15% clinical success at 12 months follow up (P > 0.05). One radiographic failure due to internal resorption at 6 months in SMART and one in the conventional group at 12 months was reported though the difference was insignificant (P > 0.05). Conclusion: Removal of all infected dentin in deep carious lesions is not required for successful caries treatment and SMART can be recommended as a potential biologic approach to manage asymptomatic deep dentinal lesions, based on optimal case selection.

Clinical Performance and Parental Satisfaction with Composite Strip Crown and Prefabricated Zirconia Crown for Primary Anterior Teeth: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

AIM: To compare clinical performance and parental satisfaction with composite strip crown and prefabricated zirconia crown for primary anterior teeth. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The study compares clinical evaluation and parental satisfaction of two different crowns for primary anterior teeth. A total of 102 teeth in each group selected between ages 3 and 6 years, who met the inclusion criteria, were randomly allocated into two groups for further evaluation. Group A for strip crowns (55 teeth) and group B for zirconia crowns (47 teeth). The crowns were evaluated clinically with various criteria like-color match, crown retention, gingival health, crown contour, opposing tooth wear, marginal integrity, and recurrent caries. The samples were also evaluated for parental satisfaction based on 5-point Likert scale and child liking was also recorded with Smiley face Likert scale at baseline, 3 and 9 months. Statistical analysis was done using Chi-square test (p <0.05). RESULTS: Zirconia crowns showed better color match, crown retention, crown contour, and gingival health. Strip crowns showed more discoloration and chipping of material over a period of time. None of the samples showed opposing tooth wear, open margins, and recurrent caries in strip and zirconia crown group. Parents and children both were highly satisfied with zirconia crowns. CONCLUSION: Clinically zirconia crowns showed higher success rate as compared to strip crowns and parental overall satisfaction was higher for zirconia crowns. CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE: Zirconia crowns exhibited a higher clinical performance and parental satisfaction; hence, if affordability is out weighted, zirconia crown stands better with esthetics of the child.