METHODS: A random convenient sampling methodology was employed for sample selection. A pre-tested 11-item questionnaire was validated on the dental officers. The survey was distributed to 182 GDPs attending the annual Malaysian Dental Association conference in January 2010. The data obtained was statistically analyzed using descriptive analysis and logistic regression was employed to predict the probability of achieving high scores.
RESULTS: A total of 182 general dental practitioners participated in the study, with the majority being female (n=153, 75%). The place of practice significantly affected the knowledge score. In the group that scored more than 80 points (n=84, 46%), 76% of them worked with government hospitals. Age, work duration and number of traumatised teeth previously treated had no significant effect. The odds ratio for place of practice indicates that respondents who work in government hospitals are 3.6 times more likely to score more than 80 points compared to those who worked in private clinics (OR=3.615, P=0.001).
CONCLUSION: The knowledge level on the management of avulsed tooth among general dental practitioners in Malaysia needs to be improved. Strategies in improvement of the Malaysian dental educational system, continuous dental educational activities and utilisation of guidelines on trauma management should be recommended to increase the knowledge level of avulsed tooth management to ensure good treatment outcomes.
CLINICAL IMPLICATION: Trauma prevention and further education regarding the management of avulsed tooth is an essential requirement to improve general dental practitioners knowledge and clinical skills.
Settings and Design: Endodontic treatment aims at disinfection and then obturation of root canal system in to prevent re-infection. Root canal irrigants play a pivotal role in the disinfection process. One of the important properties of an irrigant is the removal of complete smear layer and debris. Smear layer has the potential to protect bacteria within the dentinal tubules; therefore removal may be prudent. Smear layer removal increases the bond strength of resin sealers which results in better apical seal.
Materials and Methods: Forty extracted single-rooted, primary teeth were allocated randomly into four groups of ten each: Group 1 - NaOCl, Group 2 - Nutmeg, Group 3 - Myrobolan, and Group 4 - Tulsi. Samples were stored in sterile saline (0.9% NaCl) and then decoronated at the level of the cementoenamel junction. Working length was determined followed by appropriate irrigation. The roots were split into two halves with a chisel and were stored in 2.5% glutaraldehyde solution for 24 h. After fixation, the samples were dehydrated in ethanol series (70, 90, and 95 and twice at 100%). Each specimen was mounted on Al stub and sputter coated with a 20 nm layer of gold. Samples were then examined using a SEM quantum 60 at magnification of ×2000.
Results: Tulsi demonstrated the most statistically significant results followed by myrobolan and nutmeg extract. All herbal extracts were found to be significantly effective than 2.5% NaOCl.
Conclusion: Tulsi, nutmeg and myrobolan can be effectively used as an irrigant in primary teeth.
METHODS: SHED (n = 3) from passage 4 were expanded in FBS (FBS-SHED) or pHS (pHS-SHED) supplemented media until passage 7. During expansion, the proliferation of SHED was determined. Cells at passage 7 were further expanded in human serum from four individual donors (iHS) for 120 h followed by assessment of cell viability and profiling of the secreted paracrine factors.
RESULTS: Proliferation of SHED was significantly higher (p
MATERIALS AND METHODS: Sixty patients with one dry socket each, at University Dental Hospital Sharjah, were divided into three treatment groups based on their choice. In group I (n = 30), conventional treatment comprising of gentle socket curettage and saline irrigation was done. Group II (n = 15) dry sockets were treated with CGF and group III (n = 15) sockets were lased with LLLT. All dry socket patients were seen at day 0 for treatment and subsequently followed-up at 4, 7, 14, and 21 days. Pain score, perisocket inflammation, perisocket tenderness, and amount of granulation tissue formation were noted.
STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: Data were analyzed as mean values for each treatment group. Comparisons were made for statistical analysis within the group and among the three groups to rank the efficacy of treatment using one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA). Statistically significant difference is kept at p < 0.05.
RESULTS: Conventional treatment group I took more than 7 days to match the healing phase of group II CGF treated socket and group III LLLT irradiated socket (p = 0.001). When healing rate between CGF and LLLT are compared, LLLT group III showed a delay of 4 days compared with CGF in granulation tissue formation and pain control.
CONCLUSION: CGF treated socket was superior to LLLT in its ability to generate 75% granulation tissue and eliminate pain symptom by day 7 (p = 0.001).
METHODS: Five single maxillary premolar extraction sockets received PRF-CS grafts and five single maxillary premolar sockets received PRF-X grafts. Linear (horizontal and vertical) measurements were accomplished using Cone Beam Computed Tomography (CBCT) images and volumetric changes were assessed using MIMICS software. Soft tissue level changes were measured using Stonecast models. All measurements were recorded at baseline (before extraction) and at 5-months post-extraction.
RESULTS: Significant reduction in vertical and horizontal dimensions were observed in both groups except for distal bone height (DBH = 0.44 ± 0.45 mm, p = 0.09) and palatal bone height (PBH = 0.39 ± 0.34 mm, p = 0.06) in PRF-X group. PRF-CS group demonstrated mean horizontal shrinkage of 1.27 ± 0.82 mm (p = 0.02), when compared with PRF-X group (1.40 ± 0.85 mm, p = 0.02). Vertical resorption for mesial bone height (MBH = 0.56 ± 0.25 mm, p = 0.008), buccal bone height (BBH = 1.62 ± 0.91 mm, p = 0.01) and palatal bone height (PBH = 1.39 ± 0.87 mm, p = 0.02) in PRF-CS group was more than resorption in PRF-X group (MBH = 0.28 ± 0.14 mm, p = 0.01, BBH = 0.63 ± 0.39 mm, p = 0.02 and PBH = 0.39 ± 0.34 mm, p = 0.06). Volumetric bone resorption was significant within both groups (PRF-CS = 168.33 ± 63.68 mm3, p = 0.004; PRF-X = 102.88 ± 32.93 mm3, p = 0.002), though not significant (p = 0.08) when compared between groups. In PRF-X group, the distal soft tissue level (DSH = 1.00 ± 0.50 mm, p = 0.03) demonstrated almost 2 times more reduction when compared with PRF-CS group (DSH = 1.00 ± 1.00 mm, 0.08). The reduction of the buccal soft tissue level was pronounced in PRF-CS group (BSH = 2.00 ± 2.00 mm, p = 0.06) when compared with PRF-X group (BSH = 1.00 ± 1.50 mm, p = 0.05).
CONCLUSIONS: PRF-CS grafted sites showed no significant difference with PRF-X grafted sites in linear and volumetric dimensional changes and might show clinical benefits for socket augmentation. The study is officially registered with ClinicalTrials.gov Registration (NCT03851289).