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 study the need for blood compatibility evaluation of medical devices that come into indirect contact with blood in order to accurately evaluate the risk of their interaction with blood.Methods Seven medical devices with indirect contact with blood were selected as samples including extension tubes of central venous catheters,port bodies of implantable drug delivery devices,infusion sets,receiving lines of dialysis equipment,auxiliary lines of left ventricular assist devices,blood monitors and catheter holders,with high-density polyethylene as the negative control,glass beads as the positive control and blank whole blood or plasma for the blank control.Partial thromboplastin time(PTT)test,platelet count test and hematology test(white blood cell and red blood cell count)were performed by direct contact method and indirect contact method,respectively.In the direct contact method,whole blood or plasma was in direct contact with the sample;while in the indirect contact method,whole blood or plasma was not in direct contact with the extraction solution,with no direct contact with the sample.Results With the indirect contact method the ratios(expressed as a percentage)of the PTT,platelate,WBC and RBC counts of the samples,positive and negative controls to those of the blank control were all higher than those with the direct contact method,and the indirect contact method had the sensitivity lower than that of the direct contact method.Conclusion Medical devices indirectly contacting blood have low risks for causing coagulation and platelet and hematologic adverse reactions,which are suggested to be evaluated for hemolysis testing only in case of the history of safe clinical use.[Chinese Medical Equipment Journal,2025,46(8):44-49]

Objective To study the need for blood compatibility evaluation of medical devices that come into indirect contact with blood in order to accurately evaluate the risk of their interaction with blood.Methods Seven medical devices with indirect contact with blood were selected as samples including extension tubes of central venous catheters,port bodies of implantable drug delivery devices,infusion sets,receiving lines of dialysis equipment,auxiliary lines of left ventricular assist devices,blood monitors and catheter holders,with high-density polyethylene as the negative control,glass beads as the positive control and blank whole blood or plasma for the blank control.Partial thromboplastin time(PTT)test,platelet count test and hematology test(white blood cell and red blood cell count)were performed by direct contact method and indirect contact method,respectively.In the direct contact method,whole blood or plasma was in direct contact with the sample;while in the indirect contact method,whole blood or plasma was not in direct contact with the extraction solution,with no direct contact with the sample.Results With the indirect contact method the ratios(expressed as a percentage)of the PTT,platelate,WBC and RBC counts of the samples,positive and negative controls to those of the blank control were all higher than those with the direct contact method,and the indirect contact method had the sensitivity lower than that of the direct contact method.Conclusion Medical devices indirectly contacting blood have low risks for causing coagulation and platelet and hematologic adverse reactions,which are suggested to be evaluated for hemolysis testing only in case of the history of safe clinical use.[Chinese Medical Equipment Journal,2025,46(8):44-49]

Objective:An in vivo mammalian hepatocyte Unscheduled DNA Synthesis(UDS)test was used to evaluate the genotoxicity of Cross-linked Sodium Hyaluronate Gel and Bone Repair Materials,providing experimental evidence for establishing a UDS testing method for medical devices and materials.Methods:0.9％sodium chloride injection and cottonseed oil were used as the solvent for test materials and negative control,respectively.N-dimethylnitrosamine(NDMA)was used as the positive control for the early sampling times,and 2-acetylaminofluorene(2-AAF)was used as the positive control for the late sampling times.SD rats were administered a single dose for toxic exposure,and liver tissues were collected at 4 h and 16 h,respectively.Hepatocytes were isolated using collagenase perfusion.After labeling with 5-ethynyl-2'-deoxyuridine(EdU),and the net average fluorescence intensity(NAFI)of cell nuclei and nucleoplasm was measured by fluorescence microscope.Data from 50 cells were used to analyze the DNA repair level.Results:Compared with the negative control groups,the positive control groups(NDMA and 2-AAF)showed highly statistically significant differences in NAFI(P＜0.01),indicating successful induction of DNA damage.There was no statistically significant differences between the cross-linked sodium hyaluronate gel groups,bone repair material groups and the negative control group(P＞0.05),suggesting that these materials did not significantly induce DNA damage under the experimental conditions.Conclusion:This study first applied EdU labeling technology to the in vivo hepatic UDS assay,achieving non-radioactive labeling through click chemistry reactions.Under the conditions of this study,cross-linked sodium hyaluronate gel and bone repair materials did not exhibit genotoxicity.In the follow-up,the sample range can be expanded and the observation period can be prolonged to further improve the genotoxicity evaluation system of medical devices.

Objective:An in vivo mammalian hepatocyte Unscheduled DNA Synthesis(UDS)test was used to evaluate the genotoxicity of Cross-linked Sodium Hyaluronate Gel and Bone Repair Materials,providing experimental evidence for establishing a UDS testing method for medical devices and materials.Methods:0.9％sodium chloride injection and cottonseed oil were used as the solvent for test materials and negative control,respectively.N-dimethylnitrosamine(NDMA)was used as the positive control for the early sampling times,and 2-acetylaminofluorene(2-AAF)was used as the positive control for the late sampling times.SD rats were administered a single dose for toxic exposure,and liver tissues were collected at 4 h and 16 h,respectively.Hepatocytes were isolated using collagenase perfusion.After labeling with 5-ethynyl-2'-deoxyuridine(EdU),and the net average fluorescence intensity(NAFI)of cell nuclei and nucleoplasm was measured by fluorescence microscope.Data from 50 cells were used to analyze the DNA repair level.Results:Compared with the negative control groups,the positive control groups(NDMA and 2-AAF)showed highly statistically significant differences in NAFI(P＜0.01),indicating successful induction of DNA damage.There was no statistically significant differences between the cross-linked sodium hyaluronate gel groups,bone repair material groups and the negative control group(P＞0.05),suggesting that these materials did not significantly induce DNA damage under the experimental conditions.Conclusion:This study first applied EdU labeling technology to the in vivo hepatic UDS assay,achieving non-radioactive labeling through click chemistry reactions.Under the conditions of this study,cross-linked sodium hyaluronate gel and bone repair materials did not exhibit genotoxicity.In the follow-up,the sample range can be expanded and the observation period can be prolonged to further improve the genotoxicity evaluation system of medical devices.

Endodontic diseases are a kind of chronic infectious oral disease.Common endodontic treatment concepts are based on the removal of inflamed or necrotic pulp tissue and the replacement by gutta-percha.However,it is very essential for endodontic treatment to debride the root canal system and prevent the root canal system from bacterial reinfection after root canal therapy(RCT).Recent research,encompassing bacterial etiology and advanced imaging techniques,contributes to our understanding of the root canal system's anatomy intricacies and the technique sensitivity of RCT.Success in RCT hinges on factors like patients,infection severity,root canal anatomy,and treatment techniques.Therefore,improving disease management is a key issue to combat endodontic diseases and cure periapical lesions.The clinical difficulty assessment system of RCT is established based on patient conditions,tooth conditions,root canal configuration,and root canal needing retreatment,and emphasizes pre-treatment risk assessment for optimal outcomes.The findings suggest that the presence of risk factors may correlate with the challenge of achieving the high standard required for RCT.These insights contribute not only to improve education but also aid practitioners in treatment planning and referral decision-making within the field of endodontics.

Chemical cleaning and disinfection are crucial steps for eliminating infection in root canal treatment.However,irrigant selection or irrigation procedures are far from clear.The vapor lock effect in the apical region has yet to be solved,impeding irrigation efficacy and resulting in residual infections and compromised treatment outcomes.Additionally,ambiguous clinical indications for root canal medication and non-standardized dressing protocols must be clarified.Inappropriate intracanal medication may present side effects and jeopardize the therapeutic outcomes.Indeed,clinicians have been aware of these concerns for years.Based on the current evidence of studies,this article reviews the properties of various irrigants and intracanal medicaments and elucidates their effectiveness and interactions.The evolution of different kinetic irrigation methods,their effects,limitations,the paradigm shift,current indications,and effective operational procedures regarding intracanal medication are also discussed.This expert consensus aims to establish the clinical operation guidelines for root canal irrigation and a position statement on intracanal medication,thus facilitating a better understanding of infection control,standardizing clinical practice,and ultimately improving the success of endodontic therapy.

The overall health condition of patients significantly affects the diagnosis,treatment,and prognosis of endodontic diseases.A systemic consideration of the patient's overall health along with oral conditions holds the utmost importance in determining the necessity and feasibility of endodontic therapy,as well as selecting appropriate therapeutic approaches.This expert consensus is a collaborative effort by specialists from endodontics and clinical physicians across the nation based on the current clinical evidence,aiming to provide general guidance on clinical procedures,improve patient safety and enhance clinical outcomes of endodontic therapy in patients with compromised overall health.