-
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Mar 2016Dental caries (tooth decay) is one of the commonest diseases which afflicts mankind, and has been estimated to affect up to 80% of people in high-income countries.... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Dental caries (tooth decay) is one of the commonest diseases which afflicts mankind, and has been estimated to affect up to 80% of people in high-income countries. Caries adversely affects and progressively destroys the tissues of the tooth, including the dental pulp (nerve), leaving teeth unsightly, weakened and with impaired function. The treatment of lesions of dental caries, which are progressing through dentine and have caused the formation of a cavity, involves the provision of dental restorations (fillings). This review updates the previous version published in 2009.
OBJECTIVES
To assess the effects of adhesive bonding on the in-service performance and longevity of dental amalgam restorations.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched the Cochrane Oral Health Group Trials Register (to 21 January 2016), the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (The Cochrane Library 2015, Issue 12), MEDLINE via Ovid (1946 to 21 January 2016) and EMBASE via Ovid (1980 to 21 January 2016). We also searched the US National Institutes of Health Trials Registry (http://clinicaltrials.gov) and the WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (www.who.int/ictrp/search/en) (both to 21 January 2016) for ongoing trials. No restrictions were placed on the language or date of publication when searching the electronic databases.
SELECTION CRITERIA
Randomised controlled trials comparing adhesively bonded versus traditional non-bonded amalgam restorations in conventional preparations utilising deliberate retention, in adults with permanent molar and premolar teeth suitable for Class I and II amalgam restorations only.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two review authors independently screened papers, extracted trial details and assessed the risk of bias in the included study.
MAIN RESULTS
One trial with 31 patients who received 113 restorations was included. At two years, 50 out of 53 restorations in the non-bonded group survived, and 55 of 60 bonded restorations survived with five unaccounted for at follow-up. Post-insertion sensitivity was not significantly different (P > 0.05) at baseline or two-year follow-up. No fractures of tooth tissue were reported and there was no significant difference between the groups or matched pairs of restorations in their marginal adaptation (P > 0.05).
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
There is no evidence to either claim or refute a difference in survival between bonded and non-bonded amalgam restorations. This review only found one under-reported trial. This trial did not find any significant difference in the in-service performance of moderately sized adhesively bonded amalgam restorations, in terms of their survival rate and marginal integrity, in comparison to non-bonded amalgam restorations over a two-year period. In view of the lack of evidence on the additional benefit of adhesively bonding amalgam in comparison with non-bonded amalgam, it is important that clinicians are mindful of the additional costs that may be incurred.
Topics: Adult; Dental Amalgam; Dental Bonding; Dental Caries; Dental Restoration Failure; Dental Restoration, Permanent; Humans
PubMed: 26954446
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD007517.pub3 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Dec 2015Crowns for primary molars are preformed and come in a variety of sizes and materials to be placed over decayed or developmentally defective teeth. They can be made... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Crowns for primary molars are preformed and come in a variety of sizes and materials to be placed over decayed or developmentally defective teeth. They can be made completely of stainless steel (know as 'preformed metal crowns' or PMCs), or to give better aesthetics, may be made of stainless steel with a white veneer cover or made wholly of a white ceramic material. In most cases, teeth are trimmed for the crowns to be fitted conventionally using a local anaesthetic. However, in the case of the Hall Technique, PMCs are pushed over the tooth with no local anaesthetic, carious tissue removal or tooth preparation. Crowns are recommended for restoring primary molar teeth that have had a pulp treatment, are very decayed or are badly broken down. However, few dental practitioners use them in clinical practice. This review updates the original review published in 2007.
OBJECTIVES
Primary objectiveTo evaluate the clinical effectiveness and safety of all types of preformed crowns for restoring primary teeth compared with conventional filling materials (such as amalgam, composite, glass ionomer, resin modified glass ionomer and compomers), other types of crowns or methods of crown placement, non-restorative caries treatment or no treatment. Secondary objectiveTo explore whether the extent of decay has an effect on the clinical outcome of primary teeth restored with all types of preformed crowns compared with those restored with conventional filling materials.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched the following electronic databases: Cochrane Oral Health Group Trials Register (to 21 January 2015), Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL; The Cochrane Library, 2014, Issue 12), MEDLINE via Ovid (1946 to 21 January 2015) and EMBASE via Ovid (1980 to 21 January 2015). We searched the US National Institutes of Health Trials Register (http://clinicaltrials.gov) and the World Health Organization (WHO) International Clinical Trials Registry Platform for ongoing trials and Open Grey for grey literature (to 21 January 2015). No restrictions were placed on the language or date of publication when searching the databases.
SELECTION CRITERIA
Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that assessed the effectiveness of crowns compared with fillings, other types of crowns, non-restorative approaches or no treatment in children with untreated tooth decay in one or more primary molar teeth. We would also have included trials comparing different methods of fitting crowns.For trials to be considered for this review, the success or failure of the interventions and other clinical outcomes had to be reported at least six months after intervention (with the exception of 'pain/discomfort during treatment and immediately postoperatively').
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two review authors independently assessed the title and abstracts for each article from the search results. and independently assessed the full text for each potentially relevant study. At least two authors assessed risk of bias and extracted data using a piloted data extraction form.
MAIN RESULTS
We included five studies that evaluated three comparisons. Four studies compared crowns with fillings; two of them compared conventional PMCs with open sandwich restorations, and two compared PMCs fitted using the Hall Technique with fillings. One of these studies included a third arm, which allowed the comparison of PMCs (fitted using the Hall Technique) versus non-restorative caries treatment. In the two studies using crowns fitted using the conventional method, all teeth had undergone pulpotomy prior to the crown being placed. The final study compared two different types of crowns: PMCs versus aesthetic stainless steel crowns with white veneers. No RCT evidence was found that compared different methods of fitting preformed metal crowns (i.e. Hall Technique versus conventional technique).We considered outcomes reported at the dental appointment or within 24 hours of it, and in the short term (less than 12 months) or long term (12 months or more). Some of our outcomes of interest were not measured in the studies: time to restoration failure or retreatment, patient satisfaction and costs. Crowns versus fillingsAll studies in this comparison used PMCs. One study reported outcomes in the short term and found no reports of major failure or pain in either group. There was moderate quality evidence that the risk of major failure was lower in the crowns group in the long term (risk ratio (RR) 0.18, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.06 to 0.56; 346 teeth in three studies, one conventional and two using Hall Technique). Similarly, there was moderate quality evidence that the risk of pain was lower in the long term for the crown group (RR 0.15, 95% CI 0.04 to 0.67; 312 teeth in two studies).Discomfort associated with the procedure was lower for crowns fitted using the Hall Technique than for fillings (RR 0.56, 95% CI 0.36 to 0.87; 381 teeth) (moderate quality evidence).It is uncertain whether there is a clinically important difference in the risk of gingival bleeding when using crowns rather than fillings, either in the short term (RR 1.69, 95% CI 0.61 to 4.66; 226 teeth) or long term (RR 1.74, 95% CI 0.99 to 3.06; 195 teeth, two studies using PMCs with conventional technique at 12 months) (low quality evidence). Crowns versus non-restorative caries treatmentOnly one study compared PMCs (fitted with the Hall Technique) with non-restorative caries treatment; the evidence quality was very low and we are therefore we are uncertain about the estimates. Metal crowns versus aesthetic crownsOne split-mouth study (11 participants) compared PMCs versus aesthetic crowns (stainless steel with white veneers). It provided very low quality evidence so no conclusions could be drawn.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
Crowns placed on primary molar teeth with carious lesions, or following pulp treatment, are likely to reduce the risk of major failure or pain in the long term compared to fillings. Crowns fitted using the Hall Technique may reduce discomfort at the time of treatment compared to fillings. The amount and quality of evidence for crowns compared to non-restorative caries, and for metal compared with aesthetic crowns, is very low. There are no RCTs comparing crowns fitted conventionally versus using the Hall Technique.
Topics: Child; Child, Preschool; Crowns; Dental Care for Children; Dental Caries; Dental Restoration Failure; Dental Restoration, Permanent; Female; Humans; Male; Molar; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Tooth, Deciduous
PubMed: 26718872
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD005512.pub3 -
Journal of Dentistry Jan 2016This systematic review was performed to evaluate the clinical outcome of coronal pulpotomy treatment to manage carious vital pulp exposure in permanent posterior teeth... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
OBJECTIVES
This systematic review was performed to evaluate the clinical outcome of coronal pulpotomy treatment to manage carious vital pulp exposure in permanent posterior teeth with closed root apices.
DATA/SOURCES
PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) guideline was used. A search of articles published between 1960 January and 2015 July was conducted in PubMed, EMBASE, and CENTRAL databases.
STUDY SELECTION
Only studies that performed full coronal pulpotomy for carious vital pulp exposure of permanent posterior teeth and had clinical and radiographic assessments during at least one-year follow-up were qualified for data analyses. The weighted mean success rate (WSR) was the primary outcome and estimated using DerSimonian-Laird random effects model. Out of 299 articles, six studies were included for the analysis of one-year WSR, and five studies were included in the analysis of two-year WSR. The one-year and two-year WSR were 94% (95% confidence interval (CI): [90,99]) and 92% (CI: [84,100]) respectively. Differences in pulp capping and restoration materials did not significantly affect success rates (Two-year WSR in the MTA and MTA-like products group vs. the calcium hydroxide group: 92% (CI: [85,99]) vs. 88% (CI: [76,100]); the amalgam group vs. the composite group: 92% (CI: [81,100]) vs. 93% (CI: [81,100])).
CONCLUSIONS
Generally, full coronal pulpotomy had a favorable success rate in treating carious vital pulp exposure of permanent mature teeth with closed root apices. More studies with control group of root canal treated teeth and longer follow-up periods are needed.
CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE
Coronal pulpotomy treatment can be considered as an intermediate treatment option in managing carious vital pulp exposures of permanent teeth with closed root apices. This option may also serve as a substitute to extraction when root canal treatment cannot be performed for low income and uninsured patients or in underserved areas.
Topics: Dental Pulp Capping; Dental Pulp Exposure; Humans; Pulp Capping and Pulpectomy Agents; Pulpitis; Pulpotomy; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 26687672
DOI: 10.1016/j.jdent.2015.12.005 -
Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic... Oct 2015Utility of various dental materials ranging from diagnosis to rehabilitation for the management of oral diseases are not devoid of posing a potential risk of inducing... (Review)
Review
INTRODUCTION
Utility of various dental materials ranging from diagnosis to rehabilitation for the management of oral diseases are not devoid of posing a potential risk of inducing allergic reactions to the patient, technician and dentist. This review aims to develop a systematic approach for the selection and monitoring of dental materials available in the market thereby giving an insight to predict their risk of inducing allergic reactions.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
Our data included 71 relevant articles which included 60 case reports, 8 prospective studies and 3 retrospective studies. The source of these articles was Pub Med search done with the following terms: allergies to impression materials, sodium hypochlorite, Ledermix paste, zinc oxide eugenol, formaldehyde, Latex gloves, Methyl methacrylate, fissure sealant, composites, mercury, Nickel-chromium, Titanium, polishing paste and local anaesthesia. All the relevant articles and their references were analysed. The clinical manifestations of allergy to different dental materials based on different case reports were reviewed.
RESULTS
After reviewing the literature, we found that the dental material reported to cause most adverse reactions in patients is amalgam and the incidence of oral lichenoid reactions adjacent to amalgam restorations occur more often than other dental materials.
CONCLUSION
The most common allergic reactions in dental staff are allergies to latex, acrylates and formaldehyde. While polymethylmethacrylates and latex trigger delayed hypersensitivity reactions, sodium metabisulphite and nickel cause immediate reactions. Over the last few years, due to the rise in number of patients with allergies from different materials, the practicing dentists should have knowledge about documented allergies to known materials and thus avoid such allergic manifestations in the dental clinic.
PubMed: 26557634
DOI: 10.7860/JCDR/2015/15640.6589 -
Journal of Dental Research Feb 2016Secondary caries lesions are the main late complication of dental restorations, limiting their life span and generating costs by repeated reinterventions. Accurate... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
Secondary caries lesions are the main late complication of dental restorations, limiting their life span and generating costs by repeated reinterventions. Accurate detection of secondary lesions is crucial for estimating the true burden of the disease and allocating appropriate treatments. We aimed to assess the accuracy of detection methods for secondary caries lesions. Clinical or in vitro studies were included that investigated the accuracy of 5 detection methods--visual, tactile, radiography, laser fluorescence, quantitative light-induced fluorescence--of natural or artificially induced secondary lesions, as verified against an established reference test. Sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative likelihood ratios, as well as diagnostic odds ratios were calculated and publication bias assessed. From 1,179 screened studies, 23 were included. Most studies were performed in vitro, on permanent posterior teeth, and had high risk of bias or applicability concerns. Lesions were on proximal (14 studies) or other surfaces and adjacent to amalgam (16 studies) or tooth-colored materials. Visual (n = 11), radiographic (n = 13), and laser fluorescence detection (n = 8) had similar sensitivities (0.50 to 0.59) and specificities (0.78 to 0.83), with visual and laser fluorescence assessment being more accurate on nonproximal surfaces and adjacent to composites, respectively. Tactile assessment (n = 7) had low accuracy. Light-induced fluorescence (n = 3) was sensitive on nonproximal surfaces but had low specificities. Most analyses seemed to suffer from publication bias. Despite being a significant clinical and dental public health problem, detection of secondary caries lesions has been assessed by only a few studies with limited validity and applicability. Visual, radiographic and laser-fluorescence detection might be useful to detect secondary lesions. The validity of tactile assessment and quantitative light-induced fluorescence remains unclear at present.
Topics: Dental Caries; Dental Restoration, Permanent; Fluorescence; Humans; Lasers; Physical Examination; Radiography, Bitewing; Recurrence; Reproducibility of Results; Sensitivity and Specificity; Touch; Transillumination; Visual Perception
PubMed: 26464398
DOI: 10.1177/0022034515611041 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Sep 2015Endodontic treatment involves removal of the dental pulp and its replacement by a root canal filling. Restoration of root filled teeth can be challenging due to... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Endodontic treatment involves removal of the dental pulp and its replacement by a root canal filling. Restoration of root filled teeth can be challenging due to structural differences between vital and non-vital root-filled teeth. Direct restoration involves placement of a restorative material e.g. amalgam or composite, directly into the tooth. Indirect restorations consist of cast metal or ceramic (porcelain) crowns. The choice of restoration depends on the amount of remaining tooth, and may influence durability and cost. The decision to use a post and core in addition to the crown is clinician driven. The comparative clinical performance of crowns or conventional fillings used to restore root-filled teeth is unknown. This review updates the original, which was published in 2012.
OBJECTIVES
To assess the effects of restoration of endodontically treated teeth (with or without post and core) by crowns versus conventional filling materials.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched the following databases: the Cochrane Oral Health Group's Trials Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE via OVID, EMBASE via OVID, CINAHL via EBSCO, LILACS via BIREME. We also searched the reference lists of articles and ongoing trials registries.There were no restrictions regarding language or date of publication. The search is up-to-date as of 26 March 2015.
SELECTION CRITERIA
Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) or quasi-randomised controlled trials in participants with permanent teeth that have undergone endodontic treatment. Single full coverage crowns compared with any type of filling materials for direct restoration or indirect partial restorations (e.g. inlays and onlays). Comparisons considered the type of post and core used (cast or prefabricated post), if any.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two review authors independently extracted data from the included trial and assessed its risk of bias. We carried out data analysis using the 'treatment as allocated' patient population, expressing estimates of intervention effect for dichotomous data as risk ratios, with 95% confidence intervals (CI).
MAIN RESULTS
We included one trial, which was judged to be at high risk of performance, detection and attrition bias. The 117 participants with a root-filled, premolar tooth restored with a carbon fibre post, were randomised to either a full coverage metal-ceramic crown or direct adhesive composite restoration. None experienced a catastrophic failure (i.e. when the restoration cannot be repaired), although only 104 teeth were included in the final, three-year assessment. There was no clear difference between the crown and composite group and the composite only group for non-catastrophic failures of the restoration (1/54 versus 3/53; RR 0.33; 95% CI 0.04 to 3.05) or failures of the post (2/54 versus 1/53; RR 1.96; 95% CI 0.18 to 21.01) at three years. The quality of the evidence for these outcomes is very low. There was no evidence available for any of our secondary outcomes: patient satisfaction and quality of life, incidence or recurrence of caries, periodontal health status, and costs.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
There is insufficient evidence to assess the effects of crowns compared to conventional fillings for the restoration of root-filled teeth. Until more evidence becomes available, clinicians should continue to base decisions about how to restore root-filled teeth on their own clinical experience, whilst taking into consideration the individual circumstances and preferences of their patients.
Topics: Adult; Crowns; Dental Restoration, Permanent; Female; Humans; Male; Middle Aged; Post and Core Technique; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Tooth Root; Tooth, Nonvital
PubMed: 26403154
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD009109.pub3 -
Quintessence International (Berlin,... Oct 2015For decades, dental restorative treatment of large and deep cavities of posterior teeth has been adequately ensured by amalgam or by indirect gold restorations; with the... (Review)
Review
OBJECTIVE
For decades, dental restorative treatment of large and deep cavities of posterior teeth has been adequately ensured by amalgam or by indirect gold restorations; with the continuing advancements in material technology and clinical techniques, alternative and more esthetic types of restorations have become feasible. Proximal box elevation (PBE) using composite resins has been advocated for relocating subgingival cavity outlines; treatment success and effects of PBE require documentation.
DATA SOURCES
An electronic search was performed on several literature databases to identify relevant articles published in indexed journals until April 2015.
METHOD AND MATERIALS
The authors independently screened the relevant papers found (PBE with composite resins).
RESULTS
This paper compiles the current knowledge about PBE (which is predominantly based on laboratory research, in particular with a focus on microleakage and marginal adaptation), revealing that flowable composites allow for a stepwise elevation of proximal cavity floors, thus simplifying treatment of deep lesions, and broadening the restorative spectrum. A case report revealing an advanced caries lesion and demonstrating the clinical application of the PBE technique together with an indirect computer-aided design/computer-assisted manufacture (CAD/CAM) all-ceramic restoration is presented, assuring the practitioner's familiarity with effective placement techniques.
CONCLUSION
PBE represents a promising two-step treatment regimen, simultaneously encompassing the benefits of immediate dentin sealing and facilitating direct or indirect adhesive restorations of cavities with margins located beneath the gingival tissues. However, high-quality randomized clinical trials are required to confirm the laboratory outcomes.
Topics: Adult; Composite Resins; Computer-Aided Design; Dental Caries; Dental Cavity Preparation; Dental Marginal Adaptation; Dental Restoration, Permanent; Humans; Male; Molar
PubMed: 26159213
DOI: 10.3290/j.qi.a34459 -
Journal of Dentistry Sep 2015The aim of the present review was to evaluate by means of a systematic review and meta-analysis the hypothesis of no difference in failure rates between amalgam and... (Comparative Study)
Comparative Study Meta-Analysis Review
OBJECTIVES
The aim of the present review was to evaluate by means of a systematic review and meta-analysis the hypothesis of no difference in failure rates between amalgam and composite resin posterior restorations.
DATA
Randomized controlled trials, controlled clinical trials and prospective and retrospective cohort studies were included in this review. The eligibility criteria included clinical trials in humans with at least 12 months of follow-up comparing the failures rates between occlusal and occlusoproximal amalgam and composite resin restorations. Clinical questions were formulated and organized according to the PICOS strategy.
SOURCE
An electronic search without restriction on the dates or languages was performed in PubMed/MEDLINE, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and Web of Science up until March 2015.
STUDY SELECTION
The initial search resulted in 938 articles from PubMed/MEDLINE, 89 titles from the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and 172 from the Web of Science. After an initial assessment and careful reading, 8 studies published between 1992 and 2013 were included in this review. According to the risk of bias evaluation, all studies were classified as high quality.
CONCLUSIONS
The results of this review suggest that composite resin restorations in posterior teeth still have less longevity and a higher number of secondary caries when compared to amalgam restorations. In relation to fractures, there was no statistically significant difference between the two restorative materials regarding the time of follow-up.
CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE
There is currently a worldwide trend towards replacing amalgam restorations with mercury-free materials, which are adhesive and promote aesthetics. It is important to perform an updated periodic review to synthesize the clinical performance of restorations in the long-term.
Topics: Acrylic Resins; Composite Resins; Dental Amalgam; Dental Restoration Failure; Humans; Polyurethanes
PubMed: 26116767
DOI: 10.1016/j.jdent.2015.06.005 -
The Open Dentistry Journal 2015Traditionally, resin composite restorations are claimed by reviews of the dental literature as being superior to glass-ionomer fillings in terms of restoration failures...
PURPOSE
Traditionally, resin composite restorations are claimed by reviews of the dental literature as being superior to glass-ionomer fillings in terms of restoration failures in posterior permanent teeth. The aim of this systematic review is to answer the clinical question, whether conventional high-viscosity glass-ionomer restorations, in patients with single and/or multi-surface cavities in posterior permanent teeth, have indeed a higher failure rate than direct hybrid resin composite restorations.
METHODS
Eight databases were searched until December 02, 2013. Trials were assessed for bias risks, in-between datasets heterogeneity and statistical sample size power. Effects sizes were computed and statistically compared. A total of 55 citations were identified through systematic literature search. From these, 46 were excluded. No trials related to high-viscosity glass-ionomers versus resin composite restorations for direct head-to-head comparison were found. Three trials related to high-viscosity glass-ionomers versus amalgam and three trials related to resin composite versus amalgam restorations could be included for adjusted indirect comparison, only.
RESULTS
The available evidence suggests no difference in the failure rates between both types of restoration beyond the play of chance, is limited by lack of head-to-head comparisons and an insufficient number of trials, as well as by high bias and in-between-dataset heterogeneity risk. The current clinical evidence needs to be regarded as too poor in order to justify superiority claims regarding the failure rates of both restoration types. Sufficiently large-sized, parallel-group, randomised control trials with high internal validity are needed, in order to justify any clinically meaningful judgment to this topic.
PubMed: 26962372
DOI: 10.2174/1874210601509010438 -
International Endodontic Journal Jul 2015Composite resin is used extensively for restoration of teeth with vital pulps. Although cell culture studies have disclosed harmful effects on pulpal cells, any untoward... (Review)
Review
Composite resin is used extensively for restoration of teeth with vital pulps. Although cell culture studies have disclosed harmful effects on pulpal cells, any untoward clinical effects, manifest as adverse pulpal responses, have yet to be determined. This study comprises a systematic review, designed to address the question of whether the risk of endodontic complications is greater with composite resin restorations than with other restorative materials, such as amalgam. The study methodology involved (i) formulation of the research question, (ii) construction and conduct of an extensive literature search with (iii) interpretation and assessment of the retrieved literature. A search of the medical database PubMed was complemented with a search of the Controlled Trials Register (CENTRAL). The initial search yielded 1043 publications, the abstracts of which were read independently by the authors. After additional searches, 10 studies were included in the review. In all the included studies, the level of evidence was assessed as low. No conclusions could therefore be drawn. The included studies reported few, if any, endodontic complications. Little or no differences emerged between teeth restored with composite resins and those restored with amalgam. To determine whether composite resin restorations of teeth with vital pulps are associated with an increased risk for development of endodontic complications such as apical periodontitis, further evidence is needed, from well-constructed studies with a large number of participants.
Topics: Composite Resins; Dental Cavity Preparation; Dental Pulp Diseases; Dental Restoration, Permanent; Humans; Periapical Diseases
PubMed: 25100025
DOI: 10.1111/iej.12364