Comparison of the Efficacy of the Panoramic and Cone Beam Computed Tomography Imaging Methods in the Surgical Planning of the Maxillary All-On-4, M-4, and V-4.

This study is aimed at analyzing the difference between the measurements made according to certain anatomical signs of the maxillary jaw using panoramic radiography and cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) to decide whether to use all-on-4, M-4, or V-4 configuration to prevent complications caused by incorrect measurements during the presurgical planning stage of the placement of implants in the all-on-4 technique. A retrospective study was conducted with 50 patients with upper edentulous jaws suitable for the all-on-4 technique, who underwent preoperative panoramic radiography and cone beam computed tomography evaluation for dental implant surgery. The shortest vertical distances between anatomical structures were measured. Measurements were made independently by two oral and maxillofacial surgeons, one experienced and the other inexperienced. A statistically significant difference was found between the mean values according to gender (p=0.045). When the measurements made by the experienced surgeon and the inexperienced surgeon were compared, there was no significant difference between panoramic radiography and cone beam computed tomography. In situations where bone measurements are required for deciding on all-on-4 or one of its configurations (M-4 and V-4), it was found that panoramic radiography gives significantly incorrect results compared to cone beam computed tomography (p<0.05). Cone beam computed tomography is more reliable than panoramic radiography and eliminates the margin of error in the planning of all-on-4 or its variations to be made by either an experienced or an inexperienced oral surgeon.

Saliva: Both a Threat and an Opportunity in Covid-19 Pandemic.

Covid-19 pandemic, continues all over the world with the increasing number of confirmed cases and performed tests day by day. It has been shown that collecting nasopharyngeal samples, as the most commonly prefered method to perform RT-PCR, has disadvantages like causing discomfort and bleeding in patients. Sample collecting procedure also renders healthcare professionals by exposing them to the risk of transmission of the virus related to the direct contact with patients. These disadvantages make this procedure undesirable for the researchers and forces them to search for an alternative technique. At this point, saliva appears as an opportunity, regarding its high viral load. On the other hand, this high viral load poses a threat, especially for professions such as dental practitioners, with too much aerosol exposure. Since dentistry is a branch of health that constantly needs direct operations, it is necessary to be protected from the virus as much as possible while caring for the patient. A literature review was done using electronic databases "PubMed," "Google Scholar," and "Cochrane Database," on January 2021. Studies have proposed many different preventive measures in this regard. Therefore, the purpose of this review is to draw attention to the saliva by bringing together the recent research and also to provide information and a perspective to dental clinicians about both prevention and a potential diagnostic technique.

Association of Oral Hygiene and Periodontal Health with Third Molar Pericoronitis: A Cross-Sectional Study.

BACKGROUND: Pericoronitis is a painful inflammatory condition commonly associated with third molar teeth. The purpose of this study was to investigate the relationship between oral hygiene and periodontal health status and the presence of pericoronitis in semi-impacted third molar teeth. METHODS: A cross-sectional study was conducted, and 54 patients having at least one mandibular vertically semi-impacted third molar tooth with or without pericoronitis were consecutively enrolled. Subjects with pericoronitis and subjects with healthy third molars were selected according to symptoms in the gingiva overlying semi-impacted third molar teeth. Periodontal health status and oral hygiene were evaluated with the measures of plaque index (PI), gingival index (GI), and total number of sites with a probing depth (PD) ≥ 4 mm. The clinical data collected in this study was analyzed with Mann-Whitney U test using SPSS 20.0 package program. RESULTS: The PI scores were found to be significantly higher in patients with pericoronitis (p < 0.05). Although the GI scores and PD scores were higher in patients with pericoronitis, the difference did not reach statistical significance when compared with those in healthy subjects (p > 0.05). CONCLUSION: The findings obtained in this study suggest that the amount of dental plaque was positively associated with third molar pericoronitis. Gingival and periodontal health conditions were similar between patients with and without pericoronitis. Improving oral hygiene and controlling dental plaque may help prevent third molar pericoronitis.