AIMS AND OBJECTIVES: To compare the effectiveness of commercially available 0.2% chlorhexidine gluconate mouthrinse and dill seed oil mouthrinse on plaque levels and gingivitis.
MATERIAL AND METHODS: A randomized controlled, double blind parallel arm study was conducted over 90 days on 90 subjects. The subjects were randomly divided into 2 groups and baseline data was collected using Loe and Silness gingival index and Quigley Hein plaque index and oral prophylaxis was performed on all the subjects. The mouthrinses included in the present study were dill seed oil and Hexodent (0.2% chlorhexidine gluconate). Intervention regarding the mouthrinsing was given to the subjects and were followed up for 45 days and 90 days, after this post intervention changes were assessed using the respective indices.
RESULTS: It was observed that there is no significant difference in gingival & plaque scores among two mouthrinses from baseline to 45 days and 90 days. It was observed that there is statistical difference in gingival and plaque scores when compared with baseline to 45 days (p<0.001), baseline to 90 days (p<0.001) and 45 days to 90 days (p<0.001) when intergroup comparisons were done.
CONCLUSION: It was concluded that dill seed oil and Hexodent (0.2% chlorhexidine gluconate) mouthrinse have similar antiplaque and antigingival effectiveness.
METHODS: A total of 208 CBCT images were examined retrospectively. Prevalence of an extra root/canal and internal morphology based on Vertucci's classification were observed in human maxillary and mandibular permanent teeth. Variations in the external and internal morphology were compared in relation to gender and tooth side (left vs right) using Pearson Chi-square and Fisher's exact tests with significance level set at p
MATERIALS AND METHODS: Two reviewers independently searched two electronic databases, PubMed and Scopus. The search was complemented from references of included studies and published reviews. Studies published in the English language through January 2021 that had assessed and documented the clinical and radiographic failure of crown or FPD in vital permanent teeth due to pulpal or periapical pathology with a follow-up of at least 12 months were selected. Data screening, data collection and extraction of data was performed. Quality of studies involved was analyzed using the Newcastle-Ottawa Quality Assessment Scale for cohort studies. Meta-analysis was done using random effects model. Publication bias was assessed using funnel plots.
RESULTS: Electronic searches provided 10,075 records among which 20 studies were selected for systematic review and 7 studies were selected for meta-analysis. With respect to quality assessment, all the studies involved were considered as high quality as the score in scale ranged between 6 and 9 as per the Newcastle-Ottawa Quality Assessment Scale for cohort studies. The meta-analyses showed that there was no statistically significant difference in the incidence of the loss of pulp vitality or pulp necrosis through clinical and radiographic examination with the follow up period of 5 years: p < 0.001, 95% CI: 0.96-1.00, I2 = 77.84%; 10 years: p < 0.001, 95% CI: 0.88-0.95, I2 = 93.59%; 15 years: p < 0.001, 95% CI: 0.92-0.96, I2 = 94.83%; and 20 years: p < 0.001, 95% CI: 0.94-0.96, I2 = 95.01%.
CONCLUSIONS: The meta-analysis revealed clinical and radiographic success rate ranging between 92% to 98% at different follow up periods ranging between 5 years and 20 years. Future high-quality randomized clinical controlled trials with a larger population are required to confirm the evidence as only observational studies were considered in this paper.