Search

This study aimed to assess better effectiveness between regenerative endodontic procedures (REP) and apexification procedures (AP) with mineral trioxide aggregate (MTA) and calcium hydroxide for inducing root end apex closure. Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) guidelines were followed and registered in PROSPERO-CRD42023398997. Electronic databases were searched for studies evaluating effectiveness of REP and AP in terms of survival rate, success rate, increase in root length, root width and decrease in apical diameter. Cochrane risk of bias (RoB) -2 tool was used for quality assesssment using RevMan 5.3. The risk ratio (RR) and standardized mean difference (SMD) was used as summary statistic measure with random effect model (P < 0.05). Nine studies were included in qualitative synthesis and eight studies for meta-analysis. Quality assessment revealed moderate to low risk of bias. The pooled estimate through RR and SMD favoured REP being superior to AP for better survival rate (RR = 1.01 (0.96 – 1.06)), success rate (RR = 1.09 (0.96 – 1.24)), increase in root length (SMD = 0.25 (-0.14 – 0.63)), root width (0.66 (0.22 – 1.10)) and decrease in apical diameter (SMD =0.66 (-0.51 – 1.83)). Funnel plot did not show any heterogeneity indicating absence of publication bias. REP significantly improved apical root end closure. AP are equally effective in forming calcific barrier, however it was concluded that regeneration procedures are comparably superior to apexification procedures with greater outcomes. Clinicians should consider employing the REP in cases when root development is severely deficient and where tooth’s prognosis is hopeless even with an apexification procedure.

After a century of controversies, we are still not certain on the relationship between airway dimensions and facial morphology. Objective: The objective of the study was to measure nasopharyngeal airway dimensions and compare it among different skeletal patterns. Materials and Methods: Forty-five cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) scans of patients between 16 and 25 years were used in the study. The nasopharyngeal airway was divided into upper, middle, and lower segments. CBCT images were grouped into skeletal Class I, Class II, and Class III. Results: There is no statistically significant difference between all the three groups for mean height of the upper, middle, and lower pharyngeal airways (P = 0.303, 0.479, and 0.077, respectively). There is no statistically significant difference between all the three groups for mean width of the upper, middle, and lower pharyngeal airways indicated by P = 0.643, 0.791, and 0.99, respectively. There is no statistically significant difference between all the three groups for mean breadth of the upper, middle, and lower pharyngeal airways (P = 0.939, 0.48, and 0.068, respectively). Furthermore, the mean total height of pharyngeal airway in Class I, Class II, and Class III groups indicates no statistically significant difference (P = 0.097). Conclusion: Nasopharyngeal airway dimensions seem to play no role in different skeletal patterns.

Infection control is a term used to describe the precautions, policies, and procedures undertaken in a healthcare setting in order to minimize the risk of spreading an infection. It helps prevent the transmission of disease-producing agents such as bacteria, viruses, and fungi from one patient to another, from the dental practitioner and dental staff to patients, and from patients to dental practitioner or other dental staff. Among the many aspects of infection control, sterilization and disinfection of instruments and associated appliances play a crucial role for any infection control regimen to be successful in a health-care setting. Sterilization and disinfection of instruments can be described in general as decontamination procedures for treating instruments, enabling their safe usage. Failure to adhere to recommended sterilization guidelines and protocols can lead to serious cross-infection causing a disease which could be far more incapacitating than what the patient was originally suffering from. It also increases the chances of persistence of the infection. In either case, treatment outcomes are drastically reduced, rendering the entire treatment unfruitful. Sterilization and disinfection of instruments are of particular significance in the field of endodontics due to the intrinsic nature of the various procedures involved as part of the field and the type of instruments that are used. Routine decontamination procedures are usually not effective due to the complex, intricate, and minute design of various endodontic instruments. In addition, it is very important to take into account the effect of various sterilization protocols on the material of the instrument. This review article aims to describe the various sterilization and disinfection procedures for endodontic instruments in a concise manner, taking into consideration the potential effects that the sterilization/disinfection procedure might have on the instrument to be sterilized. Hopefully, it will make it easier for clinicians to choose the most suited/appropriate sterilization and disinfection procedure for any given endodontic instrument.