Background: Differential diagnosis between tooth pain of inflammatory and neuropathic origin is crucial since treatment strategies differ. Aim: Evaluate and compare self-reported and clinically observed pain characteristics in patients with SAP (symptomatic apical periodontitis) and PDAP (persistent dento-alveolar pain disorder). Methodology: Patients diagnosed with SAP and PDAP were recruited from Malmö University and Folktandvården Östergötland. Data collection included clinical examination and questionnaire (tooth pain characteristics, verbal pain description [short-form McGill Pain Questionnaire; SF-MPQ], factors affecting the pain). Results: Data from 24 patients with SAP and 20 with PDAP (24 females, mean age 53 years) were analyzed. Average pain intensity was 4.4 (0–10 numeric rating scale) and average duration 1527 days. 64% reported continuous and 27% recurrent pain. 58% of teeth were tender to percussion and 66% to apical palpation. 27% reported concurrent pain from jaw muscles/joints. Significant differences were found for gender (% females; PDAP>SAP;p=0.013), pain duration (PDAP>SAP;p<0.0001), pain frequency (PDAP>SAP;p<0.001), percussion tenderness (SAP>PDAP;p=0.012), muscle/joint pain (PDAP>SAP;p=0.021). SF-MPQ and affecting factors did not differ (p=0.096–1.000). Conclusion: Preliminary results indicate that pain intensity, pain description and factors affecting the pain are similar for SAP and PDAP. Female gender, long pain duration, high pain frequency, and concurrent muscle/joint pain presented more frequently in PDAP.

Pain arising for the teeth and supporting structures is a very common complaint, affecting around 9% of adults in the UK, and it can sometimes be difficult to determine the exact cause. In this narrative review, we explore the underlying neurophysiology of odontogenic pain and describe the relevance of this to clinical practise. We discuss characteristic features of pain arising from the various dentoalveolar structures and common oral disorders, and consider that non-odontogenic pain may occasionally present as toothache. As well as describing current approaches to reaching a reliable diagnosis, we also discuss some innovative techniques and potential future developments in this area. 

Evidence-based clinical diagnostic criteria for temporomandibular joint (TMJ) arthritis are not available. To establish (i) criteria for clinical diagnosis of TMJ arthritis and (ii) clinical variables useful to determine inflammatory activity in TMJ arthritis using synovial fluid levels of inflammatory mediators as the reference standard. A calibrated examiner assessed TMJ pain, function, noise and occlusal changes in 219 TMJs (141 patients, 15 healthy individuals). TMJ synovial fluid samples were obtained with a push-pull technique using the hydroxycobalamin method and analysed for TNF, TNFsRII, IL-1, IL-1ra, IL-1sRII, IL-6 and serotonin. If any inflammatory mediator concentration exceeded normal, the TMJ was considered as arthritic. In the patient group, 71% of the joints were arthritic. Of those, 93% were painful. About 66% of the non-arthritic TMJs were painful to some degree. Intensity of TMJ resting pain and TMJ maximum opening pain, number of jaw movements causing TMJ pain and laterotrusive movement to the contralateral side significantly explained presence of arthritis (AUC 0.72, P<.001). Based on these findings, criteria for possible, probable and definite TMJ arthritis were determined. Arthritic TMJs with high inflammatory activity showed higher pain intensity on maximum mouth opening (P<.001) and higher number of painful mandibular movements (P=.004) than TMJs with low inflammatory activity. The combination TMJ pain on maximum mouth opening and Contralateral laterotrusion <8mm appears to have diagnostic value for TMJ arthritis. Among arthritic TMJs, higher TMJ pain intensity on maximum mouth opening and number of mandibular movements causing TMJ pain indicates higher inflammatory activity.

AIMS: To assess intraoral inter- and intraexaminer reliability of three qualitative measures of intraoral somatosensory function and to compare these measures between patients with atypical odontalgia (AO) and healthy controls. METHODS: Thirty-one AO patients and 47 healthy controls participated. Inter- and intraexaminer reliability was tested on a subgroup of 46 subjects (25 AO; 21 healthy). Sensitivity to touch, cold, and pinprick stimuli was evaluated on the painful gingival site and the corresponding contralateral site in AO patients, and bilaterally on the gingiva of the first maxillary premolars in controls. Patients were asked to report hypersensitivity, hyposensitivity, or normal sensitivity to stimuli on the painful site compared with the nonpainful site. Kappa values were calculated, and chi-square and Fisher's exact tests were used to compare frequencies between groups. RESULTS: Kappa values ranged between 0.63 and 0.75. The frequency of hypersensitivity to either modality was significantly higher in patients (29% to 61%) than in controls (9% to 17%) (P < .015), whereas reports of hyposensitivity were similar between groups (2% to 16%) (P > .057). Only 3.2% of the AO patients had no reports of abnormal sensitivity on any of the tests, compared with 59.6% of the healthy subjects (P < .001). CONCLUSION: Intraoral qualitative somatosensory testing can detect intraoral sensory disturbances in AO patients, and the reliability is sufficient for initial screening of orofacial somatosensory function.

Chair-side intraoral somatosensory examination in patients with atypical odontalgia and healthy subjects L Baad-Hansen, M Pigg, S Elmasry Ivanovic, H Faris, T List, M Drangsholt, P Svensson Aim of investigation: In patients with persistent orofacial pain, assessment of somatosensory function is recommended. A chair-side qualitative examination with good reliability revealing signs of hyper-/hyposensitivity to touch, cold and painful pinprick stimulation may be performed. The aim of this multicenter study was to compare three qualitative measures of intraoral somatosensory function between patients with atypical odontalgia (AO) and healthy subjects. Methods: 31 AO patients (6 male, 25 female; mean age: 54±13) and 47 healthy age- and sex-matched controls (15 male, 32 female: mean age: 47±12) were recruited from Malmö University (Sweden), University of Washington (USA) and Aarhus University (Denmark). In AO patients, sensitivity to touch, cold, and pinprick stimuli was evaluated on the buccal gingiva adjacent to the painful site and the corresponding contralateral ‘mirror-image’ gingival site. In healthy subjects, tests were performed bilaterally on the buccal gingiva adjacent to the first maxillary premolars. Patients were asked to report hyper-, hypo-, or normo-sensitivity/- algesia to touch, cold and painful stimuli on the painful site compared with the contralateral site; healthy subjects were asked to compare sensitivity between sides. Χ2-tests were used to analyze differences in frequency of hyper-, hyposensitivity or normosensitivity between groups. Results: The frequency of subjectively reported normosensitivity to all stimulus modalities were significantly lower in patients (23-58%) than in healthy subjects (68-91%), P<0.001. Frequency of hypersensitivity to all modalities were significantly higher in patients (29-61%) than in controls (9-17%), P<0.015, whereas reports of hyposensitivity were similar between groups (2-16%), P>0.054. Conclusion: A quick and simple chair-side evaluation of intraoral somatosensory function can detect intraoral sensory disturbances in AO patients, mainly in the form of hyper-sensitivity. These tests may be useful in the initial screening of patients with persistent orofacial pain.

Intraoral somatosensory sensitivity in patients with atypical odontalgia (AO) has not been investigated systematically according to the most recent guidelines. The aims of this study were to examine intraoral somatosensory disturbances in AO patients using healthy subjects as reference, and to evaluate the percent agreement between intraoral quantitative sensory testing (QST) and qualitative sensory testing (QualST). Forty-seven AO patients and 69 healthy control subjects were included at Universities of Washington, Malmö, and Aarhus. In AO patients, intraoral somatosensory testing was performed on the painful site, the corresponding contralateral site, and at thenar. In healthy subjects, intraoral somatosensory testing was performed bilaterally on the upper premolar gingiva and at thenar. Thirteen QST and 3 QualST parameters were evaluated at each site, z-scores were computed for AO patients based on the healthy reference material, and LossGain scores were created. Compared with control subjects, 87.3% of AO patients had QST abnormalities. The most frequent somatosensory abnormalities in AO patients were somatosensory gain with regard to painful mechanical and cold stimuli and somatosensory loss with regard to cold detection and mechanical detection. The most frequent LossGain code was L0G2 (no somatosensory loss with gain of mechanical somatosensory function) (31.9% of AO patients). Percent agreement between corresponding QST and QualST measures of thermal and mechanical sensitivity ranged between 55.6% and 70.4% in AO patients and between 71.1% and 92.1% in control subjects. In conclusion, intraoral somatosensory abnormalities were commonly detected in AO patients, and agreement between quantitative and qualitative sensory testing was good to excellent.

The reliability of comprehensive intra-oral quantitative sensory testing (QST) protocol has not been examined systematically in patients with chronic oro-facial pain. The aim of the present multicentre study was to examine test-retest and interexaminer reliability of intra-oral QST measures in terms of absolute values and z-scores as well as within-session coefficients of variation (CV) values in patients with atypical odontalgia (AO) and healthy pain-free controls. Forty-five patients with AO and 68 healthy controls were subjected to bilateral intra-oral gingival QST and unilateral extratrigeminal QST (thenar) on three occasions (twice on 1 day by two different examiners and once approximately 1 week later by one of the examiners). Intra-class correlation coefficients and kappa values for interexaminer and test-retest reliability were computed. Most of the standardised intra-oral QST measures showed fair to excellent interexaminer (9-12 of 13 measures) and test-retest (7-11 of 13 measures) reliability. Furthermore, no robust differences in reliability measures or within-session variability (CV) were detected between patients with AO and the healthy reference group. These reliability results in chronic orofacial pain patients support earlier suggestions based on data from healthy subjects that intra-oral QST is sufficiently reliable for use as a part of a comprehensive evaluation of patients with somatosensory disturbances or neuropathic pain in the trigeminal region.

Reliability of intraoral quantitative sensory testing (QST) in patients with atypical odontalgia and healthy controls – a multicenter study The reliability of a comprehensive intraoral quantitative sensory testing (QST) protocol has not been examined systematically in patients with chronic orofacial pain. Also, the reliability of QST z-scores has not been reported. Aim of Investigation: The aim of the present multi-center study was to examine test-retest and inter-examiner reliability of intraoral QST measures in terms of absolute values and z-scores as well as within-session coefficients of variation (CV) values in patients with atypical odontalgia (AO) and healthy pain-free controls. Methods: Fourty-five AO patients and 68 healthy controls were subjected to bilateral intraoral gingival QST and unilateral extraoral QST (thenar) on three occasions (twice on one day by two different examiners and once approximately one week later by one of the examiners). Interclass correlation coefficients and kappa values for inter-examiner and test-retest reliability were computed. Results: Most of the standardized intraoral QST measures (absolute values and z-scores) showed fair to excellent inter-examiner (9-12 of 13 measures) and test-retest (7-11 of 13 measures) reliability. Furthermore, no robust differences in reliability measures or within-session variability (CV) were detected between AO patients and the healthy reference group. Conclusions: These reliability results in chronic orofacial pain patients support earlier suggestions based on data from healthy subjects that intraoral QST (absolute values as well as z-scores) is sufficiently reliable for use as a part of a comprehensive evaluation of patients with somatosensory disturbances or neuropathic pain in the trigeminal region.

BackgroundUncertainty is present in many situations in dental practice, but must not prevent wise clinical decision-making. Dental education should acknowledge uncertainty and teach useful management strategies. This study explored if dental students are aware of, and comfortable with uncertainty. The aims were to (i) measure students’ comfort or discomfort with and awareness of uncertainty while conducting risk assessment, and (ii) investigate whether a reflection exercise makes the students more aware of, and comfortable with, uncertainty.

MethodsIn January 2021, final-year students (n = 51) were randomized to either a structured written reflection exercise (intervention) or to a control exercise. Five months later, in June, each group was assigned the other exercise (cross-over design; ensuring a sufficient sample). Students’ statements of uncertainty and comfort were gathered using a developed questionnaire before and after the exercises. The students were blinded to which of the exercises was the intervention. The exercises and questionnaire were administered in mandatory sessions on an internet-based learning platform, ensuring anonymity and informed consent. Potential carryover effects were mitigated by analyzing intervention exercise data from both groups but control exercise data only from the first group.

ResultsAt baseline 80% (41/51) of the students stated feeling very uncertain, uncertain or neither certain nor uncertain about assessing the risk and 84% were comfortable or very comfortable with their ability to handle the situation, with no between-group differences. The majority, 57% (29/51) of the students stated that they thought an experienced colleague would feel certain or very certain. After the exercise in June, 36% (9/25) of the students exposed to the reflection exercise changed their statements on how certain they felt about their capacity to handle the case.

ConclusionsThe exercise did not affect the awareness of uncertainty and the students’ comfort with it, as the majority of students stated already feeling comfortable in their ability to handle the situation at baseline. However, the reflection exercise highlighted the students’ perception that experience is important in managing uncertainty. There is a need for further research to better understand students’ and teachers’ perception and attitudes to uncertainty and its effective management.

Clinical trial numberNot applicable.

Aims: Reflection on a deeper level is recognized as an important skill to learn for undergraduate students since mastering reflection can be helpful throughout their future careers. The aim with this study was to (i) examine if short structured written reflections could stimulate deep reflection among a group of dental students and (ii) explore specifically how the students reflected on clinical experience in relation to uncertainty when assessing the risk for exacerbation of apical periodontitis in root filled teeth.Methods: Short reflections were written by 52 dental students at Malmö University in 2021. All students first answered some questions associated with the risk for exacerbation of apical periodontitis in a case with a root filled tooth with a diffuse widening of the periodontal ligament space. After this, they were asked to write short reflections following prompts developed specifically to stimulate reflection. For each student, the reflections were analyzed and the level of reflection according to the 4Rs framework (Reporting/responding, Relating, Reasoning, Reconstructing) was assessed. The written content in the reflections were analyzed by a qualitative method, Systematic Text Condensation (STC). Results: Thirteen of the students (25%) reached the deepest level of reflection, Reconstructing. Sixteen students (31%), reached only the most superficial level, Report/respond. Two themes about experience and lack of experience were identified in the reflections: Theme 1 “The meaning of clinical experience” and Theme 2 “Differences and similarities”. The themes were subdivided into nine subgroups and described in more detail the relationship between experience and certainty as perceived by the students.Conclusions: A short reflection exercise stimulated deep reflection in a proportion of, but not all, dental students. The students believed that certainty comes with experience even when there is a lack of scientific evidence.

INTRODUCTION: The aim of this study was to evaluate the frequencies of nonsurgical retreatment, root-end surgery, extraction, and further restoration of root-filled teeth in Sweden in 2009 during a follow-up period of 5 years and to compare the outcomes in teeth restored with direct or indirect restorations. METHODS: Data from the Swedish Social Insurance Agency were analyzed, and the frequencies of nonsurgical retreatment, root-end surgery, extractions, and further restoration were calculated for all teeth registered as root filled during 2009. Chi-square tests were applied to detect any significant differences in the frequency of further treatment in teeth registered as restored with either a direct or an indirect restoration within 6 months of root filling. RESULTS: Of the 248,299 teeth reported root filled in Sweden in 2009, nonsurgical retreatment was registered in 2.2%, root-end surgery in 1.0%, and extractions in 9.2% during the follow-up period. Of the teeth restored with a direct restoration within 6 months after the root filling, 30.3% were registered as having undergone at least 1 further direct restoration; the corresponding percentage of teeth with indirect restorations was 6.4%. A statistically significant difference in the frequency of nonsurgical retreatment, extraction, and further restoration was found; teeth restored with an indirect restoration within 6 months of root filling had fewer of these treatments than those restored by direct restoration. CONCLUSIONS: Low frequencies of nonsurgical retreatment and root-end surgery were reported 5 years after root filling, whereas extraction was more common. Fewer additional treatment procedures were registered for teeth with indirect restorations than for those with direct restorations.

Introduction: The aims were to investigate 1) the frequency of nonsurgical retreatment, root-end surgery, extraction, and further restorative treatment during a follow-up of 10 to 11 years after root filling and compare the frequencies according to tooth group and type of coronal restoration, and 2) the timing of nonsurgical retreatment, root-end surgery, and extraction.

Methods: Data were collected from the Swedish Social Insurance Agency's register. A search for treatment codes identified teeth root filled in 2009 and the type of coronal restoration (direct, indirect, unspecified) registered within 6 months of root filling. The root-filled teeth were followed 10-11 years, and further interventions were recorded. Descriptive statistics and Chi-square tests were used for statistical analysis.

Results: In 2009, root fillings were registered for 215,611 individuals/teeth. Nonsurgical retreatment, root-end surgery, and extraction were undertaken in 3.5%, 1.4%, and 20% teeth, respectively. The frequency of further interventions varied with respect to tooth group and type of coronal restoration, but only slightly for endodontic retreatments. Further interventions, except for root-end surgery, were registered more often for molars and directly restored teeth (P < 0.001). The majority of endodontic retreatments were undertaken within 4 years, while extractions were evenly distributed over 10-11 years.

Conclusions: The frequency numbers of nonsurgical retreatment and root-end surgery were low, despite one in five root-filled teeth registered as extracted. Further interventions were most common in molars and directly restored teeth. Endodontic retreatments were performed more often during the first 4 years.

Objectives: Chronic continuous dentoalveolar pain (CCDAP) is a new term for chronic pain around teeth. Quantitative sensory testing (QST) has shown promise as a tool for studying mechanisms of pain conditions. Aims: 1) compare sensory parameter values in CCDAP patients and symptom-free controls; and 2) characterize the somatosensory profile of patients with CCDAP. Methods: The German Neuropathic Pain QST protocol of 13 somatosensory function tests was adapted for intraoral use. Cases with CCDAP from tertiary care clinics were tested along with symptom-free controls. QST was performed intra-orally on symptomatic facial gingiva, asymptomatic contralateral site, and non-trigeminal site (thumb). Means and standard deviations were compared between symptomatic and asymptomatic sites within cases and with controls. Results: Interim analyses of 17 controls and 13 cases showed a mean age of 37 years for controls and 55 for cases. At the thumb, significant differences (p < 0.05) between cases/controls were apparent for pressure pain threshold (PPT) 353 vs. 453 kPa; mechanical pain threshold (MPT) 75 vs. 161 mN; and cold pain threshold (CPT) 8.4 vs. 2.8 C, all showing cases more sensitive. At the painful gingival site, significant differences between cases/controls existed for: CPT 17.4 vs. 8.1 C; HPT 44 vs. 49 C; MPT 55 vs. 154 mN; and PPT 106 vs. 172 kPa. Non-painful parameters, such as cold and warm detection threshold were generally not significantly different between cases/controls at thumb and painful gingival sites. Among cases only, comparing painful to nonpainful side, MPT was 55 vs. 96 mN; mechanical pain sensitivity 4.7 vs. 3.0; PPT 106 vs. 122 kPa, all more sensitive on the painful site. Conclusions: These results suggest that CCDAP patients are more sensitive to multiple modalities of painful stimulation at both non-trigeminal and trigeminal sites, and may be exhibiting a trigeminal neuropathy with gain in function. Grant: NIHR21DE018768.

Background: Development of a standardized set of topic-specific outcomes known as a Core Outcome Set (COS) is important to address issues of heterogeneity in reporting research findings in order to streamline evidence synthesis and clinical decision making.

Aim: The aim of the current international consensus study is to identify "what" outcomes to include in the Core Outcome Set for Endodontic Treatments (COSET). Outcomes of various endodontic treatments (non-surgical root canal treatment, surgical endodontics, vital pulp treatment and revitalization procedures) performed on permanent teeth were considered.

Methods: A standard validated methodology for COS development and reporting was adopted. The process involved identification of existing outcomes through four published scoping reviews. This enabled creation of a list of outcomes to be prioritized via semi-structured patient interviews, e-Delphi process and a consensus meeting with a range of relevant global stakeholders. Outcomes were prioritized using a 1-9 Likert scale, with outcomes rated 7-9 considered critical, 4-6 are important and 1-3 are less important. Outcomes rated 7-9 by ≥70% and 1-3 by <15% of participants were considered to achieve consensus for inclusion in the COS. The outcomes that did not achieve consensus in the first round were considered for further prioritization in the second Delphi round and consensus meeting. Final decisions about the outcomes to include in COSET were made by voting during the consensus panel meeting using the Zoom Poll function.

Results: A total of 95 participants including patients contributed to the COS development process. The consensus panel recommended, with strong consensus, eight outcomes shared across all treatment modalities for inclusion in COSET: pain; signs of infection (swelling, sinus tract); further intervention/exacerbation; tenderness to percussion/palpation; radiographic evidence of disease progression/healing; function; tooth survival; and patient satisfaction. Additional treatment specific outcomes were also recommended.

Discussion: Many of the outcomes included in COSET are patient reported. All should be included in future outcomes studies.

Conclusion: COSET identified outcomes that are important for patients and clinicians and validated these using a rigorous methodology. Further work is ongoing to determine "how" and "when" these outcomes should be measured.

Aim: This study compared cool detection thresholds, warm detection thresholds and heat pain thresholds at intra- and extraoral locations and measured the influence of spatial summation. Material and Methods: Thirty healthy individuals (15 females and 15 males), mean age 24.9 years, range 20-31 years) participated in the study. Thresholds for warm detection (WDT), cool detection (CDT) and heat pain threshold (HPT) were measured using a thermotester (MSA–Modular sensory Analyzer, Somedic). The intraoral thermode was custom-made with a 9x9mm square surface. The average of three measurements was recorded. Four intraoral sites (gingival regions 24 and 34, tip of the tongue, lower lip) and two extraoral sites (infraorbitalis, thenar) were measured in each participant. To measure spatial summation, five acrylic covers (tip areas: 0.81 cm2, 0.50 cm2, 0.28cm2, 0.125cm2, 0 cm2) were made to fit the thermode. Five measurements on the tip of the tongue were averaged for each acrylic cover. Results: Of the extraoral sites, the cold detection threshold was significantly higher and the heat pain threshold was significantly lower at the infraorbitalis than at the thenar. Of the intraoral sites, the cold detection threshold was significantly lower at the tongue than at any of the other intraoral locations; the heat pain threshold was significantly lower on the tip of the tongue than on the lower lip. Warm detection and heat pain thresholds rose slightly with increasing thermode size, and this association was more pronounced than for cold detection thresholds. Conclusion: Temperature thresholds differed significantly between several anatomic sites, and the association between size of stimulation area and temperature thresholds was weak.

Essentially, root fillings are performed to preserve natural teeth. Over time, however, some root-filled teeth will inevitably be extracted. The aim of this historical prospective cohort study in the adult Swedish population was to identify factors associated with extractions within 5 y of registration of a root filling. The cohort consisted of all those whose root fillings had been reported to the tax-funded Swedish Social Insurance Agency (SSIA) in 2009. Demographic data on the individuals registered with a root filling (sex, age, country of birth, disposable income, educational level, and marital status) were received from Statistics Sweden or the SSIA. Dental care setting, tooth type, and any registration of subsequent restorations within 6 mo were received from the SSIA. Multivariable regression analysis was used, and P < 0.05 was considered statistically significant. In total, 216,764 individuals had been registered with at least 1 root filling. Individuals (n = 824) without complete data were excluded from the analyses. After 5 y, 9.3% of the root-filled teeth had been registered as extracted. Logistic regression analysis found significant associations for all variables except country of birth, disposable income, and educational level. The highest odds ratios for extractions were associated with the type of restoration: teeth with no registration of any restoration and teeth with a direct restoration combined with a post were 3 times more likely to undergo extraction than teeth restored with an indirect restoration combined with a post and core. Overall, high odds ratios for extractions were associated with any type of composite restoration, including composite fillings and crowns combined with or without any post. In summary, after root filling in the Swedish adult population, several individual- and tooth-specific variables were associated with extraction. The reasons for the extractions remain to be studied further.

Collaboration is essential to focus on the urgent research questions and to fill knowledge gaps in Odontology. Larger research consortiums have a better potential to utilize different competencies and other resources, and consequently increase research output. Bigger, more complex projects can be undertaken, which in turn improves the potential to attract external funding. Collaboration with other institutions also facilitates academic meriting, which is highly desirable from a Swedish perspective, especially since the number of senior researchers with formal competence to supervise doctoral research projects is lower than ever before. Here, we present EndoReCo, a Scandinavian research network in Endodontics initiated a decade ago with these very opportunities in mind. The article describes the results of this collaboration to date, highlights the success factors and difficulties, and aims to inspire others to similar collaborations in other disciplines.

Artikeln beskriver apikal parodontit med respektive utan systemisk spridning, och hur olika prioriterade åtgärder kan appliceras på ett antal typfall.

INTRODUCTION: The aim was to assess survival in the Swedish population of teeth treated by nonsurgical root canal treatment during 2009. METHODS: Data from the Swedish Social Insurance Agency were analyzed by Kaplan-Meier analysis to assess cumulative tooth survival during a period of 5-6 years of all teeth that were root-filled during 2009. RESULTS: In 2009, 248,299 teeth were reported as root-filled. The average age of the patients at the time of the root filling was 55 years (range, 20-102 years). The teeth most frequently root-filled were the maxillary and mandibular first molars. During the 5- to 6-year period 25,228 of the root-filled teeth (10.2%) were reported to have been extracted; thus 223,071 teeth (89.8%) survived. Tooth survival was highest in the youngest age group (93.2%). The highest survival (93.0%) was for the mandibular premolars, and the lowest (87.5%) was for the mandibular molars. Teeth restored with indirect restorations within 6 months of the root filling had higher survival rates (93.1%) than those restored with a direct filling (89.6%). CONCLUSIONS: In the adult population of Sweden, teeth that are root-filled by general practitioners under the tax-funded Swedish Social Insurance Agency have a 5- to 6-year survival rate of approximately 90%.

BACKGROUND: Multivariable prediction models are used in oral health care to identify individuals with an increased likelihood of caries increment. The outcomes of the models should help to manage individualized interventions and to determine the periodicity of service. The objective was to review and critically appraise studies of multivariable prediction models of caries increment.

METHODS: Longitudinal studies that developed or validated prediction models of caries and expressed caries increment as a function of at least three predictors were included. PubMed, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science supplemented with reference lists of included studies were searched. Two reviewers independently extracted data using CHARMS (Critical Appraisal and Data Extraction for Systematic Reviews of Prediction Modelling Studies) and assessed risk of bias and concern regarding applicability using PROBAST (Prediction model Risk Of Bias ASessment Tool). Predictors were analysed and model performance was recalculated as estimated positive (LR +) and negative likelihood ratios (LR -) based on sensitivity and specificity presented in the studies included.

RESULTS: Among the 765 reports identified, 21 studies providing 66 prediction models fulfilled the inclusion criteria. Over 150 candidate predictors were considered, and 31 predictors remained in studies of final developmental models: caries experience, mutans streptococci in saliva, fluoride supplements, and visible dental plaque being the most common predictors. Predictive performances varied, providing LR + and LR - ranges of 0.78-10.3 and 0.0-1.1, respectively. Only four models of coronal caries and one root caries model scored LR + values of at least 5. All studies were assessed as having high risk of bias, generally due to insufficient number of outcomes in relation to candidate predictors and considerable uncertainty regarding predictor thresholds and measurements. Concern regarding applicability was low overall.

CONCLUSIONS: The review calls attention to several methodological deficiencies and the significant heterogeneity observed across the studies ruled out meta-analyses. Flawed or distorted study estimates lead to uncertainty about the prediction, which limits the models' usefulness in clinical decision-making. The modest performance of most models implies that alternative predictors should be considered, such as bacteria with acid tolerant properties.

TRIAL REGISTRATION: PROSPERO CRD#152,467 April 28, 2020.

AIM: To (1) investigate the frequency and characteristics of pain and discomfort associated with root filled teeth in adult patients regularly attending the Public Dental Service in Örebro County, Sweden; (2) assess the association between symptoms and clinical and radiographic findings, and (3) explore the impact of pain and discomfort from root filled teeth on daily life. METHODOLOGY: Patient records of adult patients (> 20 years) scheduled for routine check-ups in April 2015 were screened to identify individuals with root filled teeth; all patients with >1 root filled tooth were asked to participate. The examination comprised clinical and radiographic examinations and questionnaires on general health, on pain symptoms from root filled teeth, and on the impact of pain on daily activities. In a general estimation equation (GEE), examination findings and patient-related factors were independently analysed in relation to the outcome "presence of pain". RESULTS: In total 550 patients with 1 256 root filled teeth participated. Fifty-three patients (9.6%) experienced pain or discomfort from 62 (4.9%) root filled teeth. Lower age, percussion tenderness and apical tenderness were significantly associated with pain (P > 0.001-P=0.044). The average pain intensity was 2.1 on (0-10) Numeric Rating Scale, and average duration was 28.4 months. The impact on daily life was low. CONCLUSIONS: On average, pain associated with root filled teeth was of mild intensity, >2 years of duration and had low impact on daily life. Although the significantly associated clinical findings may indicate apical periodontitis as the most probable explanation in some teeth, the origin of pain from root filled teeth remains partly unexplained.

To compare pain characteristics, impact of pain and characteristics of patients withpainful root-filled teeth with and without signs of inflammatory dental disease. Thiscross-sectional study was performed in the Public Dental Health services, RegionÖrebro County, Sweden. Adult patients with ≥1 root-filled tooth identified at theirregular check-up were included and assigned to one of two groups; those with ≥1sign of inflammatory dental disease (DD+) and those without any such sign (DD−).Patients/teeth were compared regarding pain characteristics (intensity, frequency,duration, quality and provoking factors), impact of pain (medication intake, impacton life) and patient characteristics as background factors (general health, other bodilyand orofacial pain). Statistics included descriptive data (frequency tables) and groupcomparisons (Chi-square, Fisher’s Exact and Mann-Whitney U-tests). The DD+ groupincluded 27 participants (30 teeth) and the DD− group 22 participants (23 teeth).On average, pain intensity was mild, the frequency most often recurrent, and theimpact was low. Average pain duration since onset exceeded 2 years in both groups.The only observed between-group differences were average pain intensity; 3.1 (0–10Numerical Rating Scale (NRS)) in DD− group compared to 1.6 for DD+ (p = 0.030),and tenderness to apical palpation; only reported in the DD+ group. The similaritiesin clinical presentation between the two groups underscore the difficulties in correctlydistinguishing between pain of odontogenic and non-odontogenic origin in root-filledteeth with a standard clinical investigation. Additional diagnostic methods need to beinvestigated for their ability to differentiate between tooth pain or discomfort of differentorigins

Aim The aim was to examine the prevalence and characteristics of pain and discomfort from root-filled teeth in an adult Swedish population regularly attending dental care. A further aim was to examine if symptoms could be related to (i) periapical radiographic appearance and (ii) clinical findings. Methodology This cross-sectional observational study screened all adult patients scheduled for routine check-up in the public dental service, Örebro County, Sweden in April 2015. All (798) individuals with at least one root-filled tooth were asked to participate. The examination included (i) clinical examination, (ii) radiographic examination (intraoral periapical images), (iii) interviewer-assisted questionnaire covering general health and presence and characteristics of pain. Descriptive statistics were performed and Fisher’s exact test analysed correlations. Results 549 patients with 1256 root-filled teeth participated (292 women, 257 men; mean age 61.1 years, range 20–94). 55 (10.0%) of the patients experienced pain or discomfort from at least one root-filled tooth. On tooth level, 66 (5.3%) of all root-filled teeth were symptomatic. The average pain intensity was 2.2±1.9 on a 0–10 Numeric Rating Scale, and mean pain duration was 32.6 months. The pain was continuous for 21.3%, recurrent for 44.3%, and occasional for 34.4% of the teeth, and the teeth had been painful on average 9.6 of the last 30 days. Apical radiolucency was recorded at 264 (21.6%) of the root-filled teeth. Symptoms were significantly associated with presence of radiolucency (P=0.004), sinus tract (P=0.023), and pocket depth >5mm (P=0.038). Conclusions In the examined population, one in ten adults with a root-filled tooth experienced pain or discomfort associated with this tooth. The pain was generally of low intensity and long lasting. In most cases, the patient experienced recurrent or occasional pain, but one in five with painful teeth had continuous pain.

AIM: To study the demographics of Swedish adults who had received a root filling, followed by extraction during the following 5-6 years in comparison with subjects who had undergone a corresponding root filling with an uneventful outcome. METHODOLOGY: The root filled maxillary first molar was chosen as the comparison model. The Swedish Social Insurance Agency provided data on all teeth reported as root filled in Sweden during 2009. A comparison group, equally large as the study group, was constructed by randomly selecting subjects with root filled maxillary first molars, which had not subsequently been extracted, that is, an uneventful outcome. Demographic data on the subjects were obtained from Statistics Sweden: country of birth, disposable income, educational level, age, civil status and gender. Chi-square, t-tests and logistic regression were used for statistical analyses. RESULTS: In the year 2009, 36 139 maxillary first molar teeth were reported to have been root filled, 4362 (12.1%) of which were then recorded as extracted during the following 5-6 year period. Only minor intergroup differences were noted: 86.5% of the study group were Swedish-born, compared with 84.4% of the comparison group (P = 0.007). Women comprised 53.2% of the study group and 50.5% (P = 0.01) of the comparison group. There was an association between extractions and gender as well as age; men had a lower odds ratio (OR) for extraction OR, 0.87; confidence interval (CI), 0.80-0.95. For every additional year, the chance for extraction was higher OR, 1.01; CI, 1.01-1.01. No other significant differences were detected. CONCLUSIONS: There was only little or no demographic differences between the study group, comprising Swedish adults who had undergone root filling of one of their maxillary first molars in 2009 and subsequent extraction during the following 5-6 years, and the comparison group, with uneventful outcomes after a corresponding root filling.

This double-blind, placebo-controlled, randomized cross-over clinical experimental study tested the reliability, validity, and sensitivity to change of punctuate pain thresholds and self-reported pain on needle penetration. Female subjects without orofacial pain were tested in 2 sessions at 1- to 2-week intervals. The test site was the mucobuccal fold adjacent to the first upper right premolar. Active lidocaine hydrochloride 2% (Dynexan) or placebo gel was applied for 5 minutes, and sensory testing was performed before and after application. The standardized quantitative sensory test protocol included mechanical pain threshold (MPT), pressure pain threshold (PPT), mechanical pain sensitivity (MPS), and needle penetration sensitivity (NPS) assessments. Twenty-nine subjects, mean (SD) age 29.0 (10.2) years, completed the study. Test-retest reliability intraclass correlation coefficient at 10-minute intervals between examinations was MPT 0.69, PPT 0.79, MPS 0.72, and NPS 0.86. A high correlation was found between NPS and MPS (r = 0.84; P < .001), whereas NPS and PPT were not significantly correlated. The study found good to excellent test-retest reliability for all measures. None of the sensory measures detected changes in sensitivity following lidocaine 2% or placebo gel. Electronic von Frey assessments of MPT/MPS on oral mucosa have good validity.

Objective: To present a list of key points for good Temporomandibular Disorders (TMDs) clinicalpractice on behalf of the International Network for Orofacial Pain and Related DisordersMethodology (INfORM) group of the International Association for Dental, Oral and CraniofacialResearch (IADR).Methods: An open working group discussion was held at the IADR General Session in New Orleans(March 2024), where members of the INfORM group finalized the proposal of a list of 10 key points.Results: The key points covered knowledge on the etiology, diagnosis, and treatment. Theyrepresent a summary of the current standard of care for management of TMD patients. They arein line with the current need to assist general dental practitioners advance their understanding andprevent inappropriate treatment.Conclusions: The key points can be viewed as a guiding template for other national and interna-tional associations to prepare guidelines and recommendations on management of TMDs adaptedto the different cultural, social, educational, and healthcare requirements.

AIM: To investigate the 5-year frequency of additional treatments in relation to the number of reported root filled canals in molar teeth in Sweden.

METHODOLOGY: The cohort included first and second molars in adult individuals who were registered with a root filling performed in 2009. Treatment codes corresponding to root fillings of teeth with from one up to four root filled canals were identified in the Swedish Social Insurance Agency database. The studied additional treatments were extraction, non-surgical root canal retreatment and endodontic surgery during the subsequent 5 years, identified by corresponding codes for these treatments registered on these specific teeth. Differences in the frequency of additional treatments based on the number of root filled canals were analysed using Chi-square test, and considered statistically significant at p<0.05.

RESULTS: In 2009, root fillings on a first or second molar tooth were registered in 100 720 individuals. The study included 32 901 maxillary first molars (6.4% with four root filled canals), 12 763 maxillary second molars (3.3% with four root filled canals), 37 703 mandibular first molars (19.2% with four root filled canals) and 17 353 mandibular second molars (3.7% with four root filled canals). The total frequency additional treatments was 14.3% (n=14 425) during the 5-year observational period. Additional treatments were more frequent in teeth with 1-3 root filled canals compared to teeth with four root filled canals for maxillary first molars (15.2% vs. 12.7%, p=0.002), maxillary second molars (13.8% vs. 9.1%, p=0.007) and mandibular first molars (14.0% vs. 10.7%, p<0.001) but not mandibular second molars (15.6% vs. 13.7%, p=0.200).

CONCLUSIONS: Over 5 years, 85.7% of the included teeth were not registered with any additional treatments. Maxillary first and second molars and mandibular first molar teeth had a greater frequency of additional treatments when ≤3 root canals were root filled compared to 4 canals.

Objective: The aim of this study was to re-assess the adoption of certain endodontic technology and central treatment principles of root canal treatments as advocated by guidelines presented by the European Society of Endodontology. Material and methods: The questionnaire included the same questions in 2003 and 2013. The general dental practitioners (GDPs) anonymously reported how frequent ('often', 'occasionally', and 'never') they used certain endodontic technology and adhered to central treatment principles. The statistical analyses were performed using Chi-squared test and Goodman-Kruskal's gamma-coefficient as an association measure. Results: The overall response rate of the 2013 group was 46.5% (n = 531). The frequencies of GDPs reporting often use of rubber dam, apex locator and rotary NiTi instruments were significantly higher (p < .0001) than in 2003, as well as reporting the use of composite resin for coronal sealing (p < .019). Adoption was significantly influenced by the factors gender (p = .601) and time since graduation (p = .361), and the cluster analyses revealed the neglected use of rubber dam to be associated with no established postoperative recall system. Conclusions: After 10 years, there was a higher frequency of GDPs who had adopted certain endodontic technologies. However, progress towards high-quality root canal treatment might be obstructed as the majority of GDPs avoids consistent use of rubber dam, and routinely neglects recalls for postoperative controls of their endodontic treatments.

BACKGROUND: Primary headache syndromes such as migraine are among the most common neurological syndromes. Chronic facial pain syndromes of non-odontogenic cause are less well known to neurologists despite being highly disabling. Given the pain localization, these patients often consult dentists first who may conduct unnecessary dental interventions even if a dental cause is not identified. Once it becomes clear that dental modalities have no effect on the pain, patients may be referred to another dentist or orofacial pain specialist, and later to a neurologist. Unfortunately, neurologists are also often not familiar with chronic orofacial pain syndromes although they share the neural system, i.e., trigeminal nerve and central processing areas for headache disorders.

CONCLUSION: In essence, three broad groups of orofacial pain patients are important for clinicians: (i) Attack-like orofacial pain conditions, which encompass neuralgias of the cranial nerves and less well-known facial variants of primary headache syndromes; (ii) persistent orofacial pain disorders, including neuropathic pain and persistent idiopathic facial/dentoalveolar pain; and (iii) other differential diagnostically relevant orofacial pain conditions encountered by clinicians such as painful temporomandibular disorders, bruxism, sinus pain, dental pain, and others which may interfere (trigger) and overlap with headache. It is rewarding to know and recognize the clinical picture of these facial pain syndromes, given that, just like for headache, an internationally accepted classification system has been published and many of these syndromes can be treated with medications generally used by neurologists for other pain syndromes.

Introduction: Assessment of somatosensory function is recommended in orofacial pain investigations. Quantitative Sensory Testing (QST) is a comprehensive method in which pressure pain threshold (PPT) measurement is included. PPT is usually obtained with a conventional Algometer Type II. A new computer-controlled and potentially more user-friendly algometer, the SENSEBox, could replace the conventional device provided that threshold values and other properties are similar between devices. Aim: Compare two algometers regarding absolute PPT, variability, time, and test-retest-reliability. Materials and methods: PPT was measured with both devices on thenar, masseter muscle and gingiva (upper premolar region) in twenty healthy adults. For each anatomic site and device, the mean value of three registrations was calculated. Paired t-test and Wilcoxon sign-rank test compared mean PPT, variability and time duration. Intraclass Correlation Coefficient (ICC) analyzed test-retest reliability. Results: The SENSEBox showed overall lower PPTs (p<0.05). No significant differences in variability and time duration were found (p>0.05). Both devices showed very good to excellent test-retest-reliability (ICC 0.75–0.88) for thenar and masseter. On gingiva, Algometer Type II showed poor (ICC 0.38) and SENSEBox good reliability (ICC 0.43). Conclusion: The Algometer Type II and SENSEBox are not readily interchangeable in PPT assessment and QST in orofacial pain investigations.

Aim: This historical prospective cohort study of the adult population of Sweden is based on data from a national registry: the primary aim was to evaluate the long-term survival of teeth after periradicular surgery. A secondary aim was to identify factors predictive of extraction within 10 years of registration of periradicular surgery.

Methodology: The cohort consisted of all individuals who had undergone periradicular surgery to treat apical periodontitis, as reported to the Swedish Social Insurance Agency (SSIA) during 2009. The cohort was followed until December 31, 2020. Subsequent registrations of extractions were collected for Kaplan-Meier survival analyses and survival tables. The patients' sex, age, dental service provider and tooth group were also retrieved from SSIA. Only one tooth per individual was included in the analyses. Multivariable regression analysis was used and P < 0.05 was considered statistically significant. The reporting guidelines STROBE and PROBE were followed.

Results: After data cleaning, and exclusion of 157 teeth, 5 622 teeth/individuals remained for analysis. The mean age of the individuals at the time of the periradicular surgery was 60.5 years (range 20-97, standard deviation 13.31); 55% were women. At the end of the follow-up, that is, up to 12 years, a total of 34.1% of the teeth had been reported as extracted. The multivariate logistic regression analysis, based on follow-up data at 10 years after registration of the periradicular surgery, included 5 548 teeth, of which 1 461 (26.3%) had been extracted. Significant associations between the independent variables tooth group and dental care setting (both P < 0.001) and the dependent variable extraction were found. The highest odds ratio (OR) for extraction applied to tooth group: compared to maxillary incisors and canines, mandibular molars were at greatest risk of extraction (OR 2.429, confidence interval 1.975-2.987, P < 0.001).

Conclusions: After periradicular surgery in predominantly elderly people in Sweden, approximately three quarters of the teeth are retained over a 10-year period. The type of tooth is associated with extraction: mandibular molars are at greater risk of extraction than maxillary incisors and canines.

Diagnostic accuracy studies play an important role in informing clinical practice and patient management, by evaluating the ability of diagnostic testing and imaging to identify the presence or absence of a disease or condition. These studies compare the relative diagnostic strength of the test or device with a reference standard, therefore, guiding clinical decisions on the reliability of the test, the need for further tests, and whether to monitor or treat a particular condition. Inadequate and incomplete reporting of diagnostic accuracy studies can disguise methodological deficiencies and ultimately result in study bias and the inability to translate research findings into daily clinical practice. The Preferred Reporting Items for Diagnostic Accuracy Studies in Endodontics (PRIDASE) guidelines are being developed in order to improve the accuracy, transparency, completeness and reproducibility of diagnostic accuracy studies in the speciality of Endodontology. The aim of this paper is to report the process used to develop the PRIDASE guidelines based on a well-established consensus process. The project leaders (PD, VN) formed a steering committee of nine members (PD, VN, PA, AF, DR, SP, CK, MP, HD) to oversee and manage the project. The PRIDASE steering committee will develop the initial draft of the PRIDASE guidelines by adapting and modifying the Standards for Reporting of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies (STARD) 2015 guidelines, adding new items related specifically to the nature of Endodontics and incorporate the Clinical and Laboratory Images in Publication (CLIP) principles. The initial guidelines will consist of a series of domains and individual items and will be validated by the members of a PRIDASE Delphi Group (PDG) consisting of a minimum of 30 individuals who will evaluate independently the individual items based on two parameters: 'clarity' using a dichotomous scoring (yes/no) and 'suitability' for inclusion using a 9-point Likert Scale. The scores awarded by each member and any suggestions for improvement will be shared with the PDG to inform an iterative process that will result in a series of items that are clear and suitable for inclusion in the new PRIDASE guidelines. Once the PDG has completed its work, the steering committee will create a PRIDASE Meeting Group (PMG) of 20 individuals from around the world. Members of the PDG will be eligible to be the part of PMG. The draft guidelines and flowchart approved by the PDG will then be presented for further validation and agreement by the PMG. As a result of these discussions, the PRIDASE guidelines will be finalized and then disseminated to relevant stakeholders through publications and via the Preferred Reporting Items for study Designs in Endodontology (PRIDE) website (http://pride-endodonticguidelines.org). Periodic updates to the PRIDASE guidelines will be made based on feedback from stakeholders and end-users.

September 2019 in Vienna, Austria. A total of 21 individuals from across the globe and four steering committee members (PD, VN, HD, LB) attended the meeting. As a consequence of the discussions, the guidelines were modified and then piloted by several authors whilst writing a manuscript. The PRIRATE 2020 guidelines contain a checklist consisting of 11 sections and 58 individual items as well as a flowchart, considered essential for authors to include when writing manuscripts for randomized clinical trials in Endodontics.

Observational studies have a significant role in establishing the prevalence and incidence of diseases in populations, as well as determining the benefits and risks associated with health-related interventions. Observational studies principally encompass cohort, case-control, case series and cross-sectional designs. Inadequate reporting of observational studies is likely to have a negative impact on decision-making in day-to-day clinical practice; however, no reporting guidelines have been published for observational studies in Endodontics. The aim of this project is to develop reporting guidelines for authors when creating manuscripts describing observational studies in the field of Endodontology in an attempt to improve the quality of publications. The new guidelines for observational studies will be named: 'Preferred Reporting items for OBservational studies in Endodontics (PROBE)'. A steering committee was formed by the project leaders (PD, VN) to develop the guidelines through a five-phase consensus process. The steering committee will review and adapt items from the STrengthening the Reporting of OBservational studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) statement and the Clinical and Laboratory Images in Publications (CLIP) principles, as well as identify new items that add value to Endodontics. The steering committee will create a PROBE Delphi Group (PDG), consisting of 30 members across the globe to review and refine the draft checklist items and flowchart. The items will be assessed by the PDG on a nine-point Likert scale for relevance and inclusion. The agreed items will then be discussed by a PROBE Face-to-Face meeting group (PFMG) made up of 20 individuals to further refine the guidelines. After receiving feedback from the PFMG, the steering committee will pilot and finalize the guidelines. The approved PROBE guidelines will be disseminated through publication in relevant journals, and be presented at national and international conferences. The PROBE checklist and flowchart will be available and downloadable from the Preferred Reporting Items for study Designs in Endodontics (PRIDE) website: . The PROBE steering committee encourages clinicians, researchers, editors and peer reviewers to provide feedback on the PROBE guidelines to inform the steering group when the guidelines are updated.

Observational studies are non-interventional studies that establish the prevalence and incidence of conditions or diseases in populations or analyse the relationship between health status and other variables. They also facilitate the development of specific research questions for future randomized trials or to answer important scientific questions when trials are not possible to carry out. This article outlines the previously documented consensus-based approach by which the Preferred Reporting items for Observational studies in Endodontics (PROBE) 2023 guidelines were developed. A steering committee of nine members was formed, including the project leaders (PD, VN). The steering committee developed an initial checklist by combining and adapting items from the STrengthening the Reporting of Observational studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) checklist and the Clinical and Laboratory Images in Publications (CLIP) principles, as well as adding several new items specifically for the specialty of Endodontics. The steering committee then established a PROBE Delphi Group (PDG) and a PROBE Online Meeting Group (POMG) to obtain expert input and feedback on the preliminary draft checklist. The PDG members participated in an online Delphi process to reach consensus on the clarity and suitability of the items present in the PROBE checklist. The POMG then held detailed discussions on the PROBE checklist generated through the online Delphi process. This online meeting was held via the Zoom platform on 7th October 2022. Following this meeting, the steering committee revised the PROBE checklist, which was piloted by several authors when preparing a manuscript describing an observational study for publication. The PROBE 2023 checklist consists of 11 sections and 58 items. Authors are now encouraged to adopt the PROBE 2023 guidelines, which will improve the overall reporting quality of observational studies in Endodontics. The PROBE 2023 checklist is freely available and can be downloaded from the PRIDE website (https://pride-endodonticguidelines.org/probe/).

Observational studies play a critical role in evaluating the prevalence and incidence of conditions or diseases in populations as well as in defining the benefits and potential hazards of health-related interventions. There are currently no reporting guidelines for observational studies in the field of Endodontics. The Preferred Reporting Items for study Designs in Endodontology (PRIDE) team have developed and published new reporting guidelines for observational-based studies called the “Preferred Reporting items for OBservational studies in Endodontics (PROBE) 2023” guidelines. The PROBE 2023 guidelines were developed exclusively for the specialty of Endodontics by integrating and adapting the “STrengthening the Reporting of OBservational studies in Epidemiology (STROBE)” checklist and the “Clinical and Laboratory Images in Publications (CLIP)” principles. The recommendations of the Guidance for Developers of Health Research Reporting Guidelines were adhered to throughout the process of developing the guidelines. The purpose of this document is to serve as a guide for authors by providing an explanation for each of the items in the PROBE 2023 checklist along with relevant examples from the literature. The document also offers advice to authors on how they can address each item in their manuscript before submission to a journal. The PROBE 2023 checklist is freely accessible and downloadable from the Preferred Reporting Items for study Designs in Endodontology (PRIDE) website (http://pride-endodonticguidelines.org/probe/).

Studies investigating the accuracy of diagnostic tests should provide data on how effectively they identify or exclude disease in order to inform clinicians responsible for managing patients. This consensus-based project was undertaken to develop reporting guidelines for authors submitting manuscripts, which describe studies that have evaluated the accuracy of diagnostic tests in endodontics. These guidelines are known as the Preferred Reporting Items for Diagnostic Accuracy Studies in Endodontics (PRIDASE) 2024 guidelines. A nine-member steering committee created an initial checklist by integrating and modifying items from the Standards for Reporting of Diagnostic Accuracy (STARD) 2015 checklist and the Clinical and Laboratory Images in Publications (CLIP) principles, as well as adding a number of new items specific to the specialty of endodontics. Thereafter, the steering committee formed the PRIDASE Delphi Group (PDG) and the PRIDASE Online Meeting Group (POMG) in order to collect expert feedback on the preliminary draft checklist. Members of the Delphi group engaged in an online Delphi process to reach consensus on the clarity and suitability of the items in the checklist. The online meeting group then held an in-depth discussion on the online Delphi-generated items via the Zoom platform on 20 October 2023. According to the feedback obtained, the steering committee revised the PRIDASE checklist, which was then piloted by several authors when preparing manuscripts describing diagnostic accuracy studies in endodontics. Feedback from this process resulted in the final version of the PRIDASE 2024 checklist, which has 11 sections and 66 items. Authors are encouraged to use the PRIDASE 2024 guidelines when developing manuscripts on diagnostic accuracy in endodontics in order to improve the quality of reporting in this area. Editors of relevant journals will be invited to include these guidelines in their instructions to authors.

The specialized anatomy of the pulp-dentin complex and the dense, predominantly noci- ceptive pulpal innervation from the trigeminal nerve explains the variety of pain sensations from this organ. Brief, sharp pain is typical of A-fibre-mediated pain, while long-lasting, dull/aching pain indi- cates C-fibre involvement. A-fibres react to cold or mechanical stimuli, such as cold drinks or toothbrushing, whereas C-fibres are mainly activated by inflammatory mediators. Thus, lin- gering pain suggests presence of irreversible pulpal inflammation. During pulpitis, structural changes of the pu pal nerves (sprouting) occur and neuropeptide release triggers an immune response; neurogenic inflammation. Pain sensations during pul- pitis can range from hypersensitivity to thermal stimuli to severe throbbing. There might also be aching pain, possibly referred and often difficult to localize. Thus, diagnosis is challenging for the clinician. Surface biofilm amplifies hypersensitivity of exposed dentin surfaces because irritants reach the pulp through open dentin tubules, producing inflammation. Removing the biofilm reduces dentin hypersensitivity, but supplemental treatment, aiming to reduce dentin permeability, is often necessary. Caries removal and filling therapy are adequate measures during reversible pulpitis if the pulp has maintained its ability to distance itself from the bacterial assault by producing reparative dentin. However, endodontic therapy is necessary when pulpitis has reached an irreversible stage.

The specialized anatomy of the pulp-dentin complex and the dense, predominantly nociceptive pulpal innervation from the trigeminal nerve, explains the variety of pain sensations from this organ. Brief, sharp pain is typical of A-fibermediated pain, whilst long-lasting, dull/aching pain indicates C- fiber involvement. A-fibers react to cold or mechanical stimuli, such as cold drinks or toothbrushing, whereas C-fibers are mainly activated by inflammatory mediators. Thus, lingering pain suggests the presence of irreversible pulpal inflammation. During pulpitis, structural changes of the pulpal nerves (sprouting) occur and neuropeptide release triggers an immune response; neurogenic inflammation. Pain sensations during pulpitis can range from hypersensitivity to thermal stimuli to severe throbbing, or aching pains that can be referred and often diffcult to localize making diagnosis a challenging situation for the clinician. The surface biofilm amplifies hypersensitivity of exposed dentin surfaces because irritants reach the pulp through open dentin tubules, producing inflammation. Removing the biofilm reduces dentin hypersensitivity but supplemental treatment aimed at reducing dentin permeability, is often necessary. Caries removal and lling therapy is adequate during reversible pulpitis if the pulp has maintained its ability to distance itself from the bacterial assault by producing reparative dentin. However, endodontic therapy is necessary when pulpitis has reached an irreversible stage.

Aim: To investigate what happens to cross-sectionally identified root-filled teeth over a 6-year period, regardless of the time that elapsed since primary root canal treatment, in a cohort of adult patients regularly attending a Public Dental Service. A secondary aim was to investigate how the cumulative events affecting root-filled teeth over the same time were associated with variables obtained from a baseline examination.

Methodology: Adult patients with ≥1 previously root-filled tooth and regularly attending the Public Dental Service in Örebro County were enrolled for study participation in 2015. General dental practitioners examined all identified root-filled teeth in this cohort at baseline using a standardized protocol and were also responsible for further decision-making and treatments. After six years, information on events of the root-filled teeth was collected from dental records. The highest rating (most invasive treatment) on a 5-point ordinal scale was used in the analyses. Regression analyses with stepwise selection were performed for associations between patient- and tooth-related factors and events.

Results: A total of 445 patients with 1007 root-filled teeth were followed the entire observation time. Twenty (2.0%) of the root-filled teeth had endodontic retreatment and 150 (14.9%) were extracted over six years. Among teeth with periapical radiolucency or pain, the majority did not undergo retreatment or extraction; however, the multivariate analysis demonstrated that retreatment or extraction was associated with baseline recordings of teeth with periapical radiolucency (p < .0001), tenderness to percussion (p < .0001), and poor coronal restoration (p < .0001).

Conclusions: This study corroborates the notion that in general dentistry, root-filled teeth with radiological signs of apical disease often remain untreated over time. Furthermore, it also reveals that root-filled teeth presenting with mild pain do not necessarily receive any intervention. However, teeth with baseline signs of apical periodontitis, pain, or inadequate coronal restoration were more likely to have received intervention during the six-year period.

Aim: To compare demographic characteristics between individuals choosing an indirect coronal restoration (crown, inlay/onlay) and individuals receiving other restorations after completion of a root filling. The hypothesis was that there are demographic differences for individuals who chose an indirect and those who chose another coronal restoration after root canal treatment. Methodology: This was a registry study of a cohort consisting of all root filled upper first molars that were reported to the tax-funded Swedish Social Insurance Agency (SSIA) during 2009. The root filled teeth were identified by tooth position 16 and 26, and by specific registry codes applied to root fillings. After registration of the root filling, any subsequent coronal restorations within two years was identified. The study group consisted of individuals registered with a root filling followed by an indirect coronal restoration and the control group was the remaining individuals with a root-filled tooth and a direct coronal restoration or no registration of any coronal restoration. Data on nationality, disposable income, educational level, civil status, age and gender were received from Statistics Sweden or SSIA. Chi-square test, t-test and logistic regression compared groups. P<0.05 was considered statistically significant. Results: 7 806 individuals (21.9%) received an indirect coronal restoration and 27 886 individuals (78.1%) comprised the control group. All demographic variables but gender and nationality differed significantly between groups A significantly larger proportion of individuals in the study group had higher education, higher disposable income, were older and were less likely to be living on their own. Conclusions: The identified demographic differences between individuals having their newly root filled teeth restored with an indirect restoration compared to those receiving other restorations indicate that the tax-funded Swedish dental insurance fails to provide dental care on equal terms for Swedish citizens.

Background: After root canal treatment, a choice is made between different coronal restorations which in the long run could affect the survival of the tooth.

Objective: To compare demographic characteristics between individuals choosing an indirect coronal restoration (crown, inlay/onlay) and individuals choosing other restorations after completion of a root filling.

Methods: The cohort consisted of all root-filled upper first molars that were reported to the tax-funded Swedish Social Insurance Agency (SSIA) during 2009. After registration of the root filling, any subsequent coronal restorations within 2 years were identified. The crown group consisted of individuals registered with an indirect coronal restoration and the restoration group was the remaining individuals with a direct coronal restoration or lacking registration. Demographic data (gender, disposable income, age, educational level, civil status and country of birth) were received from Statistics Sweden or the SSIA. Statistical analyses included chi-square test, t test and logistic regression analysis. P < 0.05 was considered statistically significant.

Results: An indirect coronal restoration was received by 7806 individuals (21.9%), and 27 886 individuals (78.1%) received a direct restoration. All demographic variables except gender differed significantly between groups. Logistic regression analysis found significant associations for all demographic variables and the registration of an indirect restoration except for country of birth and gender.

Conclusions: The identified demographic differences between individuals choosing to restore their newly root-filled teeth with an indirect restoration compared to those receiving other restorations may indicate that the tax-funded Swedish dental insurance fails to provide dental care on equal terms for Swedish citizens.