Prospective, Randomized, Clinical Evaluation of Preformed Zirconia Crowns and Stainless Steel Crowns on Permanent First Molars: 12-Month Results.

PURPOSE: The purpose of this prospective, randomized, parallel-group clinical study was to evaluate and compare the clinical outcome of preformed zirconia crowns and preformed stainless steel crowns when used to restore permanent first molars. METHODS: Patients with severely decayed, badly broken down hypomineralized or hypoplastic permanent first molars that required a full-coverage restoration were invited to parti- cipate in the study. Sixty-nine healthy, cooperative children, ages six to 12 years, were recruited for the study. Following informed consent, 36 preformed zirconia crowns and 36 stainless steel crowns were placed and assessed at one week, three months, nine months, and 12 months accord- ing to the modified United States Public Health Service Ryge criteria. The parameters evaluated were: the time required for preparation and ce- mentation; plaque accumulation; marginal integrity; fracture of the crown; retention of cement; interference with the eruption of the permanent second molar; and parental acceptance. RESULTS: The clinical evaluation revealed statistically comparable performance in crown retention, fracture, marginal integrity, and plaque retention at 12 months between crown types. Preformed zirconia crowns were preferred by the parents primarily because of esthetics. However, a significant difference was seen in the clinical time required for the preparation and placement of preformed zirconia crowns, which was nearly twice that for stainless steel crowns. CONCLUSIONS: After 12 months of clinical evaluation, preformed zirconia crowns performed comparably to stainless steel crowns in their ability to restore decayed or hypomineralized permanent first molars. However, zirconia crowns took nearly twice as long to prepare, fit, and cement.

Management of internal and external root resorption in primary teeth of a 3-year-old with myelomeningocele: A case report.

BACKGROUND: Myelomeningocele (MMC) is a severe manifestation of spina bifida. Children with MMC have motor disability, hydrocephalus, skeletal abnormalities, and mental retardation. These individuals are more susceptible to caries due to poor oral hygiene, carbohydrate-rich diet, prolonged use of sugar-containing medications and limited motor abilities. Latex allergy is an important factor to be considered during the dental rehabilitation of such patients. CASE REPORT: A 3-year-old girl visited the dental clinic with the chief complaint of multiple carious teeth and H/o neural tube defect (NTD) which had been operated on at the age of 6 weeks. On dental examination, multiple dental abscesses and severe early childhood caries were noted. Radiographic evaluation revealed internal root resorption of tooth "K" and external root resorption of tooth "T." The two teeth were treated with ledermix paste followed by obturation with Vitapex® (Diadent Group International Inc., Burnaby, BC, Canada) along with triple antibiotic paste and placement of stainless steel crown (SSC). A latex-free environment was maintained during the entire treatment to prevent allergic reaction. A follow up after 42 months indicated clinical and radiographical success. CONCLUSION: The paper reports succesfull management of internal and external root resorption as well as latex allergy in a dental operatory. The dental perspective while dealing with patients having NTD is limited. Explaining the particulars of the treatment plan will aid in management of such cases .

An 18-Month Prospective Randomized Clinical Trial Comparing Zirconia Crowns with Glass-reinforced Fiber Composite Crowns in Primary Molar Teeth.

Purpose: The purpose of this clinical trial was to assess the clinical performance of primary molar zirconia crowns with a glass fiber-reinforced composite crown (GFRC) in primary molar teeth. Methods: This trial was designed as a prospective, randomized, bilateral split-mouth study. A total of 66 crowns were placed in 30 children, ages four to nine years, from October 2018 until January 2019. Assessment of the clinical performance was done at one week and at three, six, 12, and 18 months. Several criteria, such as color match, time taken for the clinical procedure, resistance to dislodgement prior to cementation, crown retention, occlusal wear, staining, gingival health, plaque retention, and parental satisfaction, were evaluated. Result: At 18 months, 58 crowns were analyzed: 30 ZR crowns and 28 GFRC crowns. There was a statistically significant difference (P<0.05) between staining, occlusal wear, gingival health, plaque retention, and parental satisfaction between groups at 18 months, with the zirconia crowns outperforming the GFRC crowns in all those categories. The only areas where GFRC crowns performed better than ZR crowns were the time required to place them and the resistance to dislodgement before cementation. Conclusion: This study demonstrated that primary molar zirconia crowns had highly acceptable and significantly better clinical performance than glass fiber-reinforced composite crowns after 18 months.