BackgroundEx vivo and in vitro studies have demonstrated the effectiveness of some irrigation protocols in reducing the bacterial load in the root canal system. However, standardized protocols have not yet been defined for the real clinical context due to many irrigation procedures available.ObjectiveTo evaluate the clinical endodontic protocols and limitations of irrigating solutions in the disinfection of the root canal system in patients with apical periodontitis.MethodsPubMed, Scopus, Embase, Web of Science, and Cochrane databases were searched for randomized controlled trials (RCT) published until January 2021. Hand searching was also performed. Studies focused on evaluating the effectiveness of irrigating solutions and/or irrigation activation methods in reducing the bacterial load in the root canal system were considered. The Cochrane risk-of-bias tool for randomized trials (RoB2) was used to assess the quality of the studies.ResultsFour hundred and twenty eight published articles were identified. After removing the duplicate studies and analyzing full texts, seven RCTs were selected. Two studies compared pure NaOCl with some combination of NaOCl with HEDP and MTAD. Two studies analyzed the antibacterial efficacy of NaOCl and chlorhexidine (CHX). Three studies compared conventional needle irrigation with different irrigation activation methods (PUI, XP-endo finisher, F-file activator, EndoVac activator). The review attained a satisfactory methodology. The main results of each included study were described.DiscussionActivation methods provide significantly higher biofilm reduction than conventional needle irrigation methods. Combinations of NaOCl with different chelating agents were ineffective in terms of antimicrobial, but it could potentially increase the risk of irrigant extrusion. However, the irrigating protocols were not carefully detailed, especially those regarding the irrigants application time or total volume. The existing literature lacks high-quality studies. The level of evidence is moderate.ConclusionsThe available data is too heterogeneous to compare and identify the superiority of specific valuable irrigation protocols in each clinical context. Application time, volume, and activation methods should be standardized to determine the optimal irrigating procedures to reduce the bacterial load and ensure higher predictability of the endodontic treatment.Systematic Review Registration(https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?RecordID=218555), PROSPERO registration: CRD42020218555.

Aim To determine the knowledge of final year undergraduate students attending Italian universities on the appropriate use of systemic antibiotics for endodontic infections. Methodology Final year dental students from twenty Italian universities completed a one‐page questionnaire on antibiotic use for the treatment of endodontic infections. Data were analysed using descriptive statistics and chi‐square tests. Results A total of three hundred and three students completed the questionnaire. The average duration of antibiotic prescription proposed by respondents was 5.48 ± 1.06 days. Amoxicillin with clavulanic acid was the first‐choice antibiotic (85.2%) followed by amoxicillin alone (13.5%), azithromycin (1.0%) and clarithromycin (0.3%), for patients not allergic to penicillin. Clarithromycin was the first‐choice drug for patients with a penicillin allergy (56.1%), followed from azithromycin (31.7%), clindamycin (11.9%) and levofloxacin (0.3%). Alveolar abscess with systemic manifestations was reported as the principal reason to prescribe antibiotics (97.7%) followed by the same condition without systemic manifestations (85.5%). For the scenario of irreversible pulpitis, 5% of students considered antibiotics necessary. Almost 52% of students would prescribe antibiotics for apical acute periodontitis; 29.7% would prescribe antibiotics for chronic apical periodontitis with sinus tract, and 13.5% indicated these drugs for chronic apical periodontitis without sinus tract. Conclusions The results demonstrate that it is necessary to improve the knowledge of Italian students on antibiotics and indications for their use in endodontics.

Introduction: On March 9, 2020, the Italian government imposed a nationwide lockdown to contain the spread of coronavirus disease 2019. Oral health services were limited to only essential services. Nonurgent treatments were postponed. This study described the management of urgent dental care in northern Italy during the lockdown, with a particular focus on the province of Brescia. Methods: A cross-sectional survey was administered to Italian dentists at the end of the lockdown (May 3, 2020). A total of 1407 dentists answered the survey. Results: A total of 1205 dentists were included. Most of the respondents were dental owners (73.6%). About 79.7% of the dentists handled urgencies during the lockdown. The number of urgencies treated weekly was lower than that generally handled before the coronavirus disease 2019 outbreak (P , .001). Many dentists (81.2%) provided telephone consultations to evaluate symptoms. Pulpitis and abscesses were the most common urgencies (44.7% and 40.2%, respectively). Furthermore, 95% of dentists wore masks, protective eyewear, and surgical gloves while delivering nonpostponable treatments. The filtering facepiece 2 mask was used by 41.8% and 41.7% of owners and dental assistants, respectively. Financial concerns, risk of contagion, and personal protective equipment supply were indicated as the main current concerns. Conclusions: Our survey showed that Italian dentists took protective measures during the lockdown, thus minimizing the risk of contagion for dental health care personnel and patients. Many precautionary guidelines are now available, but a high uncertainty persists about dental health delivery during the pandemic.

Background: After the first lockdown, Italian dentists resumed their practice while handling several challenges. Reducing contagion risk by complying with the stringent measures recommended by the Italian Ministry of Health for dental activity while also balancing patient needs was a difficult task. This work aims to understand the procedures that were adopted in the second phase of the COVID-19 pandemic (5 May–30 September 2020) and the dentists’ expectations and concerns about returning to normalcy. Methods: A national survey with 38 questions was conducted from November 2020 to January 2021 and comparisons were performed among the five main Italian geographic areas. Results: Located mainly in northwest Italy, 1028 dentists were included in the survey. About 83% of the Italian dentists fully restarted their activities after the lockdown. The resumption was significantly marked in North Italy and the Center than in the South (p < 0.01). Over 80% adopted the recommended precautional guidelines, modifying them according to the specific dental treatment executed. Fifty percent of dentists were confident in returning to normalcy after the COVID-19 crisis. Many precautions adopted during the pandemic will be continued, especially in South Italy and the Islands (p < 0.01). Conclusions: Italian dentists reported excellent autonomous organizational skills and the maintaining of high-quality precautions during the reopening phase.

The COVID-19 epidemic has changed patients’ approach to dental treatments. While dentists worldwide have shown an excellent level of adaptability to face the new challenges presented by the unprecedented situation due to the rapid spread of COVID-19, dental patients have witnessed a sudden suspension of elective treatments and a slow resumption of dental care activities after several national lockdowns. In addition, the general climate of anxiety and fear due to the high COVID-19 risk and the high level of mortality has influenced the perception and attitudes of people towards dental activity, inducing many dental patients to avoid appointments to the dentist if not highly urgent. We present an overview of the current state of knowledge about dental patients’ perception, perspective, attitude, and expectations towards a full resumption of regular dental treatments.