Peter Parashos’s research while affiliated with University of Melbourne and other places

The interpretation of the clinical signs and symptoms arising from the interdisciplinary relationship between orthodontics and endodontics becomes more complicated when superimposed by dental trauma. A history of dental trauma before or during orthodontic tooth movement may have implications for pulpal health and clinical outcomes. An understanding of the biology is essential for appropriate treatment planning. This review and treatment recommendations will assist dental practitioners in managing orthodontic-endodontic interactions.

Cone‐beam computed tomography (CBCT) is a three‐dimensional imaging modality which can aid endodontic diagnosis and treatment planning. While there are guidelines available describing the indications, there are divergent philosophies on when this technology should be applied in clinical practice. This paper reviews the applications of CBCT including the clinical relevance of parameters which can be assessed, highlights the limitations of this technology, and provides guidance on how to maximise its clinical utility.

Aim This study investigated the adoption of cone‐beam computed tomography (CBCT) by dentists and endodontists around the world, including their preferences in endodontic CBCT usage. Methodology An online questionnaire surveyed dental association members in Australia and New Zealand, and endodontic association members in Australia, Britain, Canada, Italy, New Zealand and the USA, about their CBCT training history, considerations in acquisition/interpretation, access to and usage of CBCT, preferred scan interpreter, and preferred endodontic scan settings. Data were analysed with Chi‐squared, independent sample t ‐tests, Cochran's Q and McNemar's tests. Results Responses from 578 endodontic specialists or postgraduates (Group E) and 185 non‐endodontic dentists (Group NE) were included. Continuing professional education (CPE) was the most common source of CBCT training (69.2%). Factors considered in CBCT acquisition/interpretation included beam hardening (75.4%), radiation exposure (61.1%) and patient movement (58.3%). Group E reported higher CBCT usage (90.8%) than Group NE (45.4%, p < .001) and greater workplace access to CBCT (81.1% vs. 25.9%, p < .001). Scans were interpreted by the respondent in most workplace scans (83.3%) and externally taken scans (60.5%); Group E were significantly more likely to interpret themselves than Group NE. Small field of view (83.6%) and high resolution (86.6%) were most preferred as settings for endodontic CBCTs; Group NE were less likely to choose these settings. There were some geographic variations within Group E. Conclusions CBCT training was most commonly acquired via CPE. Endodontic respondents reported very high CBCT usage and access in the workplace. There are educational implications regarding CBCT limitations, appropriate applications and interpretation.

The literature is replete with articles describing the many and varied interactions between endodontic treatment and orthodontic tooth movement (OTM), often reporting conflicting views and findings, which creates confusion for clinicians. Original research and review articles have described aspects such as apical root resorption and potential pulpal complications of teeth related to OTM. Some interactions are of relatively minor clinical significance, whilst others may have adverse consequences. A history of dental trauma before or during OTM further complicates the interactions. This review re-assesses the historical literature on endodontic-orthodontic interactions in light of more recent research and presents guidelines for managing clinical situations involving both disciplines. © 2023 Australian Dental Association.

Aim: To investigate current endodontic practices, adoption of technologies and continuing education attendance within specialist endodontic practice globally and to identify geographic trends. Methodology: A web-based survey of endodontic association members in Australia, Britain, Canada, Italy, New Zealand and the USA on routine treatment preferences, armamentarium and education attendance was conducted. Chi-squared, independent sample t-tests, Cochran's Q test and McNemar's test were performed. Results: The survey was completed by 543 endodontists or endodontic post-graduate students. Almost all respondents used the dental operating microscope (DOM, 91.3%), engine-driven nickel-titanium instruments (NiTi, 97.6%), electronic apex locators (EAL, 93.0%), cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT, 91.2%) and calcium silicate-based materials (CSBMs, 93.7%). Dental dam was always used by 99.1%. Over half used irrigation adjuncts (81.8%), warm vertical compaction (74.6%) and heat-treated NiTi (60.2%). Geographic comparison between AP (Asia-Pacific, n = 78), AM (Americas, n = 402) and EM (Europe and Middle East, n = 63) was performed. AM and EM preferred single-visit treatment more (p < .001) and used higher sodium hypochlorite concentrations than AP. AM had more access to CBCT in the workplace (86.6%) than AP (65.4%, p < .001) and used CBCT for routine preoperative assessment (39.6%) more than EM (7.3%, p < .001). Almost all of EM used irrigation adjuncts (95.2%), more than AM (78.1%, p = .001). AP used steroid/antibiotic medicaments most (p < .001) and had the highest attendance at continuing education programmes. Conclusion: Several endodontic-specific armamentaria have reached almost complete adoption within global specialist endodontic practice, whilst the continued uptake of newer technologies should be followed over time. Some practising philosophies varied significantly across different geographic regions.

There is ample published literature regarding the technical aspects of restoring root-filled teeth, but little concerning the biological impacts, consequences, and criteria for the selection of direct restorative materials following endodontic treatment. The provision of an effective coronal seal in addition to a sound root filling is known to be important in the prevention of root canal infection. This review seeks to explore the evidence concerning the selection of dental materials in the restoration of root-filled teeth, specifically with a close examination of the properties of commonly used materials as orifice barriers. © 2023 Australian Dental Association.

Background: This study investigated endodontic clinical preferences, adoption of newer technologies and information sources among dentists and endodontists. Methods: Dental and endodontic society members in Australia and New Zealand were surveyed online regarding their endodontic treatment preferences, armamentarium, information sources and continuing professional education (CPE) attendance. Results: Complete responses were received from 71 endodontic specialists or postgraduates (Group E) and 139 general dentists (Group D). Most of Group E used dental operating microscopes (95.8%), endodontic cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT; 98.6%) and calcium silicate-based materials (CSBMs; 97.2%), significantly more (P < 0.001) than Group D (86.3% used loupes, <32% used CBCT for endodontics or CSBMs). Most respondents used dental dam always for endodontics (94.3%), electronic apex locators (EAL; 81.0%) and engine-driven nickel-titanium (NiTi) instruments (91.4%); Group E had more experience with engine-driven NiTi (P < 0.001). Endodontic CPE attendance was highest at dental association programs (P < 0.001) while hands-on NiTi training attendance was highest via commercial companies (P < 0.05). Online information sources were commonly used (38.8% of Group D, 59.2% of Group E). Conclusion: Dental dam, EAL and engine-driven NiTi were almost universally used. The endodontic group reported high adoption of newer endodontic technologies. Endodontic CPE and information sources should be further surveyed as online engagement evolves. © 2023 Australian Dental Association.

Background: Rotary nickel-titanium (NiTi) instruments are made to exacting standards and are costly to manufacture, and quality control is paramount. Consequently, unauthorized factories make counterfeit instruments that are less expensive and may therefore be attractive to dentists. Little information exists about the metallurgy and manufacturing quality of such instruments. There is the potential for counterfeit instruments to be at higher risk of fracture during treatment, thereby compromising clinical outcomes. The aim of this study was to evaluate physical and manufacturing properties of genuine and counterfeit ProTaper Next™ and Mtwo® rotary NiTi instruments. Methods: This study investigated the metallurgical properties, manufacturing quality, microhardness and number of cycles to failure of two commonly used rotary NiTi systems and compared them with counterfeit products purporting to be genuine articles. Results: Counterfeit instruments were found to be inferior in manufacturing standards and were less resistant to cyclic fatigue when compared to genuine instruments. Conclusions: Counterfeit rotary NiTi instruments may be less efficient at preparing root canals and may be at higher risk of fracture during endodontic treatment. Dentists must be aware that, although less expensive, counterfeit instruments may be of dubious manufacturing quality and at higher risk of fracture if used in patients. © 2023 Australian Dental Association.

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/).