Background: A rapid bacterial diagnostic is needed more and more in the treatment of patients, because of the emergence of antibiotic resistance. The cumulative antibiogram, an annual report that monitors antimicrobial resistance trends in health care facilities, may provide a profile of empirical therapy useful in diverse emergency situations, such as transmission of resistant bacteria to oral cavity of newborn babies. We aimed to draw a profile of antibiotic resistance encountered. Methods: We assessed the antibiotic resistance (ABR) profile in childbearing women and newborn babies in Ploiesti Obstetrics and Gynecology Hospital by the disk diffusion method characterizing the multidrug-resistant organisms after isolation and identification by phenotypic tests. Extended-spectrum β-lactamase (ESBL)-producing Enterobacterales (ESBL-E), Carbapenem-resistant Enterobacterales (CRE), vancomycin-resistant Enterococci (VRE), methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) and vancomycin resistant Group B Streptococcus (VR-GBS) were detected. Results: The prevalence of antibiotic resistance was 11.32% (53/468), while the prevalence of the ESBL-E, MRSA, VRE and VR-GBS strains was 8.34% (39/468). Within the bacteria isolated from fifty-three childbearing women, the prevalence of ESBL-E, MRSA, VRE and VR-GBS was 22.64% (12/53), 32.08% (17/53), 11.32% (6/53) and 7.55% (4/53). In the whole studied group, the prevalence was 2.56% (12/468), 3.63% (17/468), 1.28% (6/468) and 0.86% (4/468). Resistant bacteria were detected at birth in the oral cavity of the newborn babies in all cases. Maternal and neonatal isolates shared similar characteristics. Conclusions: Cumulative antibiogram is useful in case of empiric treatment needed in diverse emergencies, such as transmission of resistant bacteria to oral cavity of newborn babies.

The aim of this study was to compare the interproximal contact tightness of lateral teeth after restoring adjacent proximal walls with four types of direct adherent biomaterials. Distal and mesial boxes were prepared on 160 artificial right first and second upper molars. Each set of 40 pairs of boxes was restored using one bulk biomaterial: Equia Forte Fil HT (GC), Cention^® Forte (IVOCLAR VIVADENT), Admira Fusion x-tra (VOCO), or 3M^TMFiltek^TM One Bulk Fill. The mean difference in the passing-through force varied from sound to restored surfaces immediately after application, as well as at 7 and 14 days after: Equia Forte Fil HT—4.07 ± 0.01, 4.08 ± 0.01, and 4.11 ± 0.01; Cention^® Forte—3.30 ± 0.01, 3.50 ± 0.01, and 3.56 ± 0.01; Admira Fusion x-tra—4.10 ± 0.01, 4.13 ± 0.01, and 4.13 ± 0.01; 3M^TMFiltek^TM One Bulk Fill—4.08 ± 0.01, 4.09 ± 0.01, and 4.07 ± 0.01 (p < 0.05). The passing-through force of the restored contact areas showed significantly higher values when compared to those for the sound surfaces, and among them, all biomaterials presented similar values, except for Cention^® Forte. The potential clinical relevance of this study relates to better knowing the most appropriate restorative material for large proximal caries on adjacent surfaces from the outset of the treatment protocol.

Background: Distal surface caries (DSC) has been associated with partially erupted impacted third molars. The purpose of this study was to compare the rates of DSC between populations that had undergone different third molar management strategies. Methods: Radiographs that had been taken during routine examinations of 1012, 251 and 250 patients in Manchester, Bucharest and Amsterdam, respectively, were evaluated. The following parameters were assessed: the state of the distal surface in the second mandibular molar, loss of periodontal support, impaction type of the third molar, contact point localization, and patients’ genders, ages and their cumulative history of dental health. Results: The rate of DSC in the second mandibular molar was 63.9%, 19.9% and 26.0% in the Manchester, Bucharest and Amsterdam populations, respectively. A loss of lamina dura of ≥2 mm, increased percentages of decayed, missing or filled teeth and male gender were risk factors in all three populations. All assessed parameters apart from the site of the mandible reached statistical significance in the Manchester sample (p < 0.001). The DSC rate was cumulative with increasing age in the Manchester population, in which third molars were strategically retained. Conclusions: The UK population, treated according to strict guidelines that limit the removal of third molars, had a statistically significant higher DSC prevalence rate (p < 0.001) than the Romanian or Dutch populations. The active surgical management of mandibular third molars seems to have the potential to reduce the DSC rate in the adjacent second molar.

This scoping review mapped the clinical readiness of directly additively manufactured (AM) dental ceramics for single-unit definitive restorations (crowns, veneers, and partial-coverage restorations) using a predefined review-specific five-tier readiness framework (R1–R5) designed to organize evidence maturity from restoration-relevant foundational studies to comparative clinical evidence. MEDLINE (PubMed), Scopus, Web of Science Core Collection, EBSCO (Dentistry and Oral Sciences Sources), and ClinicalTrials.gov were searched from inception to February 2026, with citation tracking. Thirty-five sources were included: 31 in vitro studies and 4 clinical studies. Evidence clustered in preclinical tiers, with most studies classified as restoration-level in vitro investigations (R2, 22/35) or foundational specimen-level studies explicitly linked to restorative performance (R1, 9/35); only one feasibility study reached R3 (1/35), three studies provided comparative clinical evidence (R4, 3/35), and no R5-level evidence was identified. The additively manufactured definitive restorations evaluated were zirconia-based. Most restoration-level studies addressed zirconia crowns (18/35), with fewer studies focusing on veneers/laminates (5/35) and occlusal veneers/tabletops (2/35). Across AM routes (most commonly vat photopolymerization ceramic workflows and nanoparticle jetting) outcomes focused on fit/adaptation, manufacturing accuracy, mechanical performance, and aging simulations; clinical studies reported short- to mid-term performance using standardized evaluation criteria. Overall, the evidence suggests technical feasibility and increasing restoration-level evaluation under controlled conditions, but clinical applicability remains preliminary because higher-readiness clinical evidence is still limited. Future work should prioritize standardized reporting, clinically relevant aging/fatigue paradigms, and longer-term comparative clinical studies.

Background: In Romania, HIV (human immunodeficiency virus) and AIDS (acquired immunodeficiency syndrome) were first acknowledged in 1989. Getting older with HIV/AIDS is now possible due to antiretroviral treatment, but it can bring dental problems due to HIV itself or to the reluctance of dental professionals to treat dental problems. Our study aims to assess the attitudes, knowledge, and practices of Romanian dental professionals regarding aging PLWHA. Methods: An analytical cross-sectional observational survey based on a self-administered questionnaire was conducted for Romanian dental professionals from October 2022 to January 2023. Results: The responders’ group profile was as follows: a mean age of 39.09 ± 0.36 years (limit: 19–75), a majority of 991 (90.01%) from urban dental offices, and 364 (33.06%) with more than twenty years’ experience. A total of 517 (46.95%) responders had an unprofessional attitude and declared that, if possible, they would avoid taking part in performing dental treatments for people living with HIV/AIDS (PLWHA). There were 89 (8.08%) dental professionals that refused to work with PLWHA. Only 363 (32.97%) had worked with one previously. The dental professionals in rural areas refused PLWHA more frequently: 20% (N = 22) of rural dental professionals vs. 6.76% (N = 67) of urban dental professionals refused to work with PLWHA (OR = 0.30; 95% CI: 0.16-.56). The logistic regression applied for the 1101 responders revealed after stepwise selection that the most influential factor for their refusal to work with PLWHA in our study group was being previously exposed to HIV during dental practice (OR = 14.45; 95% CI: 8.55- 24.42; p = 0.000). Conclusions: Dental educators and health care planners should promote the knowledge of prophylaxis and positive attitudes towards the treatment of PLWHA. Successful resolution of these concerns is time consuming and expensive but necessary if dentists are to satisfy their professional obligations to HIV/AIDS patients.

Background/Objectives: This scoping review mapped clinical, in vitro, and in silico evidence on non-metal primary crowns in telescopic and double-crown systems involving natural teeth, including retention, wear, mechanical behavior, clinical outcomes, and auxiliary retention-control elements. Methods: PubMed/MEDLINE, Scopus, Dentistry & Oral Sciences Source through EBSCO, and Web of Science were searched for English-language reports published from 2015 onward. These limits and the exclusion of case reports were predefined in a written, unregistered protocol. Elicit provided supplementary citation discovery, and a targeted backward reference-list check was performed using the same eligibility criteria. Findings and extractable numerical retention outcomes were charted descriptively without formal critical appraisal or quantitative pooling. Results: Forty-eight reports were included, 40 in vitro, one in silico, and seven clinical reports, representing six identifiable cohorts. Two clinical reports arose from the same randomized cohort. The backward reference-list check identified nine additional eligible reports. Clinical evidence was concentrated on zirconia primary crowns with electroformed or electroplated gold secondaries, although two additional short-term trials evaluated zirconia with polymeric secondary structures. Retention varied with the complete material and design combination. Four laboratory reports examined auxiliary retention-control concepts; no clinical study isolated their effects. Conclusions: Clinical evidence remains very limited. Polymeric primary crowns and auxiliary retention-control elements were represented mainly by laboratory evidence. Retention should be interpreted as a system-level outcome. Mixed-support outcomes require support-specific interpretation, and this review does not establish comparative clinical superiority.