Background: The aim of our study was to explore the influence of weekly subcutaneous administration of interleukin-6 (IL-6) receptor inhibitor tocilizumab (TCZ) on periodontal status in a local longitudinal study of patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) and periodontal disease (PD). Methods: We performed a 6-month prospective study in 51 patients with chronic periodontitis and moderate-to-severe RA starting TCZ in accordance with local recommendations. Extensive rheumatologic (clinical activity, inflammatory, serological biomarkers) and periodontal (visible plaque index, gingival index, bleeding on probing, probing pocket depth, clinical attachment loss) assessments were done. Changes in RA activity and periodontal status were reassessed after 3 and 6 months. Results: We demonstrated significant correlations between periodontal status, disease activity, and serologic biomarkers (p < 0.05). Tocilizumab significantly improved the gingival index scores and decreased the number of sites with bleeding on probing after only 3 months (p < 0.05), while the probing pocket depth significantly decreased after 6 months; overall, clinical attachment loss presented only slight changes without any statistical significance as well as teeth count and plaque levels (p > 0.05). Conclusion: IL-6 inhibition is able to improve periodontal outcomes in patients with RA and concomitant PD, which is essentially related to a dramatic decrease in serum inflammatory mediators.

Graphene, as a promising material, holds the potential to significantly enhance the field of dental practices. Incorporating graphene into dental materials imparts enhanced strength and durability, while graphene-based nanocomposites offer the prospect of innovative solutions such as antimicrobial dental implants or scaffolds. Ongoing research into graphene-based dental adhesives and composites also suggests their capacity to improve the quality and reliability of dental restorations. This narrative review aims to provide an up-to-date overview of the application of graphene derivatives in the dental domain, with a particular focus on their application in prosthodontics and periodontics. It is important to acknowledge that further research and development are imperative to fully explore the potential of graphene and ensure its safe use in dental practices.

Temporomandibular disorders (TMDs) encompass a heterogeneous group of musculoskeletal and neuromuscular conditions affecting the temporomandibular joint (TMJ) and masticatory system. Due to academic stress and parafunctional habits, dental students may be particularly vulnerable to TMD. Objective: To determine the prevalence of TMD symptoms and their psychosocial and functional correlates among students at the Faculty of Dental Medicine, UMPh Iasi, Romania, using the diagnostic criteria for TMD (DC/TMD) self-report axis and axis II instruments. Methods: In this cross-sectional survey, 356 volunteer students (66.0% female; mean age, 22.9 ± 3.6 years) out of a total population of 1874 completed an online DC/TMD–based questionnaire. Axis I assessed orofacial pain, joint noises, and mandibular locking. Axis II instruments included the Graded Chronic Pain Scale (GCPS), Jaw Functional Limitation Scale (JFLS-20), Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ-9), Generalized Anxiety Disorder-7 (GAD-7), and Oral Behaviors Checklist (OBC). Descriptive statistics summarized frequencies, means, and standard deviations; χ² tests and t-tests compared subgroups by sex; Pearson correlations explored relationships among continuous measures (α = 0.05). Results: A total of 5% of respondents reported orofacial pain in the past 30 days; 41.6% observed TMJ noises; 19.7% experienced locking episodes. Mean JFLS score was 28.3 ± 30.5, with 4.8% scoring > 80 (severe limitation). Mean PHQ-9 was 5.96 ± 5.37 (mild depression); 15.5% scored ≥ 10. Mean GAD-7 was 5.20 ± 4.95 (mild anxiety); 16.0% scored ≥ 10. Mean OBC score was 12.3 ± 8.5; 30.1% scored ≥ 16, indicating frequent parafunctional habits. Symptom prevalence was similar by sex, except temporal headache (43.4% females vs. 24.3% males; p = 0.0008). Females reported higher mean scores for pain intensity (2.09 vs. 1.55; p = 0.0013), JFLS (32.5 vs. 18.0; p < 0.001), PHQ-9 (6.43 vs. 5.16; p = 0.048), and OBC (13.9 vs. 9.7; p = 0.0014). Strong correlation was observed between PHQ-9 and GAD-7 (r = 0.74; p < 0.001); moderate correlations were observed between pain intensity and PHQ-9 (r = 0.31) or GAD-7 (r = 0.30), between JFLS and pain intensity (r = 0.33), and between OBC and PHQ-9 (r = 0.39) (all p < 0.001). Conclusions: Nearly half of dental students reported TMD symptoms, with appreciable functional limitation and psychosocial impact. Parafunctional behaviors and psychological distress were significantly associated with pain and dysfunction. These findings underscore the need for early screening, stress-management interventions, and interdisciplinary care strategies in the dental student population.

The COVID-19 pandemic has forced the transfer of traditional on-site educational activities to the online environment. This study aimed to evaluate the perception and acceptance of remote learning among fixed prosthodontic students attending the Faculty of Dental Medicine of “Grigore T. Popa” University of Medicine and Pharmacy in Iasi, Romania, and to analyze the feedback regarding their experience with the new online methods, the perceived quality thereof and suggestions for improvement. An observational cross-sectional, online study based on 22 questions was conducted with 259 students. The general opinion of online education was good or very good (40.15%); regarding its efficiency, 28.57% found it efficient while 34.36% found it inefficient or very inefficient; regarding the pleasure of learning online, 45.95% of students enjoyed online learning, while 36.64% did not enjoy it. The problem that was most cited by respondents was that of keeping all students motivated and involved (65.6%). Sixty-two percent of the respondents believe that online dental education should not exist, or just to a small extent, a result justified by the practical nature of the profession. The general opinion was that health risks should be managed and mitigated by using a hybrid system that would allow students to do on-site clinical training with direct contact with patients.

Background: Temporomandibular disorders (TMDs) are common musculoskeletal conditions associated with pain, functional limitation, and reduced quality of life (QoL). Despite the widespread use of conservative and minimally invasive treatments, the available evidence remains fragmented across heterogeneous interventions, diagnostic criteria, and outcome measures, limiting comparative interpretation and clinical applicability. Objectives: The primary objective of this systematic review is to evaluate the effectiveness of conservative and minimally invasive interventions for pain reduction in adult patients with temporomandibular disorders. Secondary objectives include assessing effects on mandibular function and QoL and exploring differences across intervention categories, TMD subtypes, diagnostic criteria, and follow-up durations. Methods: This protocol is registered in the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO; CRD420251250251) and adheres to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Protocols (PRISMA-P) guidelines. A systematic search will be conducted in PubMed/MEDLINE, Web of Science, Scopus, Embase, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) published from 1 January 2015, up to the date of study initiation, using controlled vocabulary terms and free-text keywords combined with Boolean operators. Eligible studies will include adult patients (≥18 years) diagnosed with temporomandibular disorders using validated diagnostic criteria and treated with conservative or minimally invasive interventions, compared with placebo/sham, no treatment or usual care, or active comparators, in accordance with the PICOS framework. Two reviewers will independently screen studies and extract data, with disagreements resolved by consensus or consultation with a third reviewer; the study selection process will be documented using a PRISMA 2020 flow diagram. Interventions will be synthesized within predefined clusters (e.g., physical and manual therapies, occlusal splint therapy, physical agent modalities, and minimally invasive joint procedures). Risk of bias will be assessed using the revised Cochrane Risk of Bias tool (RoB 2). The primary outcome will be pain intensity, while secondary outcomes will include mandibular function and QoL. Where appropriate, meta-analysis using a random-effects model will be performed; otherwise, a structured narrative synthesis will be provided. Expected Impact: The systematic review is expected to deliver an updated and methodologically rigorous synthesis of evidence on conservative and minimally invasive interventions for TMDs. By addressing existing research gaps such as the fragmentation of evidence across intervention types, heterogeneity in diagnostic criteria, and variability in outcome measures, this review will support evidence-based clinical decision-making and identify priorities for future research.

Indirect posterior restorations combining complete occlusal coverage with extension onto an axial surface are described inconsistently, and their biomechanical advantage remains uncertain. This review compared failure load and a review-defined severe-failure category of morphology-defined axial-extension restorations with occlusal-only restorations and full-coverage crowns. PubMed, Scopus, Embase, and Web of Science Core Collection were searched from inception and last checked on 22 July 2026; citation searching supplemented the database searches. Eligible studies tested restorations meeting the morphological definition in extracted human posterior teeth. Two reviewers independently selected studies, extracted data, and appraised risk of bias using RoBDEMAT with QUIN as a supplementary appraisal. Multiple eligible intervention arms were combined, and shared comparators were counted once. Exploratory random-effects models estimated average effects across heterogeneous laboratory systems using ratios of means (RoMs) and mean differences (MDs) for failure load and risk ratios (RRs) for review-defined severe failure. Eight studies were included. Five independent studies contributed to the main comparison, restricted to single-surface axial-extension versus occlusal-only restorations. Failure-load estimates were inconclusive (RoM 0.98, 95% CI 0.88 to 1.09; MD −23 N, 95% CI −195 to 149). Severe-failure events were sparse and inconsistently defined across the source studies; exact counts were therefore primary, and the pooled RR was exploratory (RR 1.10, 95% CI 0.65 to 1.86). Three studies compared axial-extension restorations with crowns, but these heterogeneous comparisons were not pooled and remained inconclusive. Current in vitro evidence is insufficient to determine whether the evaluated axial-extension designs affect failure load or the occurrence of review-defined severe failure. Imprecision, methodological heterogeneity, and indirectness for clinical performance preclude claims of clinical superiority. A routine strength benefit of the evaluated axial-extension designs cannot be inferred. Standardized preparation definitions, testing protocols, and failure reporting are required. Registration: OSF, DOI 10.17605/OSF.IO/9PXE5 (retrospective).