Apical microsurgery is accurate and minimally invasive, produces few complications, and has a success rate of more than 90%. However, due to the lack of awareness and understanding of apical microsurgery by dental general practitioners and even endodontists, many clinical problems remain to be overcome. The consensus has gathered well-known domestic experts to hold a series of special discussions and reached the consensus. This document specifies the indications, contraindications, preoperative preparations, operational procedures, complication prevention measures, and efficacy evaluation of apical microsurgery and is applicable to dentists who perform apical microsurgery after systematic training.
Microsurgery/standards* ; Humans ; Apicoectomy ; Contraindications, Procedure ; Tooth Apex/diagnostic imaging* ; Postoperative Complications/prevention & control* ; Consensus ; Treatment Outcome

Pulpotomy, which belongs to vital pulp therapy, has become a strategy for managing pulpitis in recent decades. This minimally invasive treatment reflects the recognition of preserving healthy dental pulp and optimizing long-term patient-centered outcomes. Pulpotomy is categorized into partial pulpotomy (PP), the removal of a partial segment of the coronal pulp tissue, and full pulpotomy (FP), the removal of whole coronal pulp, which is followed by applying the biomaterials onto the remaining pulp tissue and ultimately restoring the tooth. Procedural decisions for the amount of pulp tissue removal or retention depend on the diagnostic of pulp vitality, the overall treatment plan, the patient's general health status, and pulp inflammation reassessment during operation. This statement represents the consensus of an expert committee convened by the Society of Cariology and Endodontics, Chinese Stomatological Association. It addresses the current evidence to support the application of pulpotomy as a potential alternative to root canal treatment (RCT) on mature permanent teeth with pulpitis from a biological basis, the development of capping biomaterial, and the diagnostic considerations to evidence-based medicine. This expert statement intends to provide a clinical protocol of pulpotomy, which facilitates practitioners in choosing the optimal procedure and increasing their confidence in this rapidly evolving field.
Humans ; Calcium Compounds/therapeutic use* ; Consensus ; Dental Pulp ; Dentition, Permanent ; Oxides/therapeutic use* ; Pulpitis/therapy* ; Pulpotomy/standards*

Intentional tooth replantation (ITR) is an advanced treatment modality and the procedure of last resort for preserving teeth with inaccessible endodontic or resorptive lesions. ITR is defined as the deliberate extraction of a tooth; evaluation of the root surface, endodontic manipulation, and repair; and placement of the tooth back into its original socket. Case reports, case series, cohort studies, and randomized controlled trials have demonstrated the efficacy of ITR in the retention of natural teeth that are untreatable or difficult to manage with root canal treatment or endodontic microsurgery. However, variations in clinical protocols for ITR exist due to the empirical nature of the original protocols and rapid advancements in the field of oral biology and dental materials. This heterogeneity in protocols may cause confusion among dental practitioners; therefore, guidelines and considerations for ITR should be explicated. This expert consensus discusses the biological foundation of ITR, the available clinical protocols and current status of ITR in treating teeth with refractory apical periodontitis or anatomical aberration, and the main complications of this treatment, aiming to refine the clinical management of ITR in accordance with the progress of basic research and clinical studies; the findings suggest that ITR may become a more consistent evidence-based option in dental treatment.
Humans ; Tooth Replantation/methods* ; Consensus ; Periapical Periodontitis/surgery*

Objective To explore the feasibility of fishing net repairing transverse fascia method for inguinal hernia (type Ⅰ , Ⅱ ) using laparoscopic surgical procedure. Methods A retrospective analysis of clinical data between the method of fishing net repairing transverse fascia surgery for 145 cases of inguinal hernia (typeⅠ,Ⅱ ) using laparoscopic surgical procedure from May 2004 to May 2008 (laparoscopic group) and the method of open repairing surgery 143 cases (open group) at the same period were conducted. The differences in the operative time, rehabilitation activities time, length of stay, cost of hospitalization and 0comphcations, recurrence rate were compared. Results The laparoscopic group was significantly better in the operative time [ ( 14.8 ± 11.5) min ], found hiding oblique hernia ( 15 cases), rehabilitation activities time[ ( 16.5 ± 14.3) h], use of analgesics(5 cases), scrotal edema(1 case), length of stay[ (4.2 ± 1.5) d], than those of the open group [ ( 37.6 ± 25.4) min, 0, (52.7 ± 12.6) h, 13, 14, ( 8.4 ± 2.6 ) d respectively ] ; but the recurrence rate was no significantly different. Conclusion Method of fishing net repairing transverse fascia for inguinal hernia (type Ⅰ , Ⅱ ) using laparoscopie surgical procedure is feasible.