Evaluation of sella turcica shape and dimensions in cleft subjects using cone-beam computed tomography

Objective: The aim of this study was to assess the morphology of the sella turcica and measure its size in cleft and non-cleft subjects

Material and Methods: Cone-beam computed tomography [CBCT] images of 54 individuals [29 males; 25 females] with cleft and 85 [22 males; 63 females] without cleft were used for this study. Syndromic patients with cleft [s] were not included because of possible additional en-docrinological and/or morphological disorders. Linear measurements included length, depth, and diameter. The shape of the sella turcica was analyzed in the cleft and noncleft groups. An independent f test was conducted to evaluate differences between genders and groups. One-way ANOVA was used to compare age groups

Results: The length [p < 0.001] of the sella turcica was smaller in noncleft subjects than in cleft subjects. Diameter [p = 0.014] and depth [p = 0.005] showed as constantly increasing from an age <15 to >25 years in the overall assessment. The distribution of the shape of the sella turcica differed significantly between groups [p < 0.001]

Conclusions: In this study, CBCT was used to assess the morphology of the sella turcica. A majority of the subjects with cleft had a flattened sella turcica compared to that of the control group. A shorter length of the sella turcica was more evident in the cleft subjects than in the control group

comparison of three different diabetes screening methods among dental patients in Turkey

This study was conducted to describe the frequency of diabetes in dental patients, and to compare three different screening methods: the random finger plasma glucose [RFPG] test, the Finnish diabetes risk score [FINDRISC] survey and a special clinical guideline developed for dental patients. The study design was cross-sectional, descriptive and comparative. The data were collected between August 2011 and February 2012. A total of 702 dental patients participated in this study. The screening tools were RFPG, FINDRISC and a clinical guideline. Data were analyzed using the Chi-squared test, the t test, analysis of variance, and the Pearson correlation test. The frequency of diabetes was 8.3% for the participants. The prevalence of participants at risk for undiagnosed diabetes was 20.1% according to the RFPG test, 29.9% according to the FINDRISC, and 29.8% according to the clinical guideline. Correlation analysis showed a significant positive correlation between the screening methods [p < 0.001 for each]. The overall frequency of diabetes was 8.3%. It was found that the three screening methods used in this study were statistically similar. However, FINDRISC and clinical guideline as the questionnaire screening tools indicated a little larger group than RFPG with respect to diabetes risk