Search

Background: Root canal therapy (RCT) and pulpotomy are two common treatment modalities for managing dental pulp infections, but their comparative effectiveness in terms of patient outcomes remains unclear. This root canal therapy (RCT) aimed to assess and compare patient outcomes between teeth treated with traditional RCT and pulpotomy. Materials and Methods: In this single-center RCT, a total of 120 patients presenting with symptomatic dental pulp infections were randomly assigned to either the RCT group or the pulpotomy group. The RCT group received conventional root canal treatment, which involved complete removal of infected pulp and obturation of the root canals. The pulpotomy group underwent a procedure where only the coronal pulp tissue was removed, followed by the placement of a medicament. Pain levels, infection resolution, and tooth survival were assessed at 6 months and 1 year posttreatment. Results: At the 6-month follow-up, patients in the RCT group reported significantly lower pain scores (2.5 ± 0.8) compared with the pulpotomy group (4.3 ± 1.2, P < 0.001). Infection resolution was also higher in the RCT group (92%) compared with the pulpotomy group (78%) at 6 months. Tooth survival rates at 1 year were significantly higher in the RCT group (95%) compared with the pulpotomy group (81%, P < 0.05). Conclusion: This RCT demonstrates that traditional RCT is superior to pulpotomy in terms of pain reduction, infection resolution, and tooth survival. Patients who underwent RCT experienced less pain, faster infection resolution, and better tooth survival rates compared with those who received pulpotomy. These findings support the use of RCT as the preferred treatment modality for dental pulp infections. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The background of the study highlighted the common occurrence of post-endodontic pain and the need for effective pain management strategies. Materials and Methods: Fifty patients were randomly assigned to two groups: the cold laser therapy (CLT) group and the traditional methods group (TMG). The CLT group received laser treatment at the affected area immediately following endodontic treatment, whereas the TMG received standard pain management techniques such as analgesics. Pain levels were assessed using a visual analog scale at baseline and at 6, 12, 24, and 48 hours post treatment. Pain scores were analyzed using appropriate statistical methods, including analysis of variance, and P values were calculated to determine the significance of differences between groups. Results: This study found significant differences in post-endodontic pain levels between CLT and standard procedures. At 6 hours post treatment, the CLT group had a mean pain score of 2.1 ± 0.8, whereas the TMG had a mean pain score of 3.8 ± 1.2 (P = 0.012). Pain levels in the CLT group decreased with time, with scores decreasing to 1.5 ± 0.6 at 12 hours, 1.2 ± 0.5 at 24 hours, and 0.9 ± 0.4 at 48 hours post treatment. In contrast, the TMG had greater pain scores at each time point: 3.2 ± 1.0, 2.9 ± 1.1, 2.5 ± 0.9, and 2.1 ± 0.8 at 12, 24, and 48 hours post treatment, respectively. At 12, 24, and 48 hours post treatment, P values of 0.021, 0.036, and 0.004, respectively, indicated significant differences. Conclusion: In managing post-endodontic pain, CLT demonstrated superior efficacy compared to traditional methods. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: In this study, the retention rates of four different pit and fissure sealant materials on the first permanent molars were clinically assessed and compared. Materials and Methods: A total of 120 kids aged 7 to 10 participated in a randomized controlled experiment. On their first permanent teeth, the subjects each got one of the four sealant materials (A, B, C, or D). Over the course of 24 months, the retention rates were evaluated every 6 months. The Chi-square test and Kaplan–Meier survival analysis were used for statistical analysis. Results: At 6, 12, 18, and 24 months, the following retention rates were observed overall: A (85%, 78%, 65%, 52%), B (90%, 82%, 70%, 60%), C (78%, 70%, 55%, 42%), and D (95%, 88%, 75%, 62%). At each time point, the sealant materials showed significant variations in retention rates (P 0.05). While sealants A and C showed lower retention rates, sealant D showed the best retention rates, followed by sealant B. Conclusion: This study shows that different materials have different retention rates for pit and fissure sealants on first permanent molars. Higher retention rates for sealants D and B suggest that they may be superior than sealants A and C. These results highlight how crucial it is to choose the right sealant materials to guarantee long-term retention and effectiveness in avoiding dental cavities. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Orthodontic treatment planning involves the precise assessment of dental and skeletal anomalies, which can be facilitated by AI-enhanced diagnostic tools. Materials and Methods: A total of 100 orthodontic cases were included in this RCT. Patients were randomly assigned to two groups: an AI-enhanced diagnostic group and a traditional diagnostic group. The AI-enhanced diagnostic group underwent orthodontic assessment with the aid of AI-powered software, which provided automated cephalometric analysis, 3D model evaluations, and treatment suggestions. The traditional diagnostic group received conventional diagnostic assessments by orthodontists. The primary outcome measures included treatment planning accuracy, treatment time, and patient satisfaction. Secondary outcomes included the number of appointments required and treatment cost. Results: The AI-enhanced diagnostic group demonstrated a significantly higher accuracy in treatment planning compared to the traditional diagnostic group (P < 0.05). The AI group also required fewer appointments (mean ± SD: 10.2 ± 2.1 vs. 12.8 ± 3.4) and had a shorter treatment time (mean ± SD: 14.6 ± 3.2 months vs. 18.9 ± 4.5 months) (P < 0.001 for both comparisons). Additionally, patient satisfaction scores were higher in the AI group (mean ± SD: 9.2 ± 0.6 vs. 8.1 ± 0.8) (P < 0.001). However, the AI-enhanced diagnostic group had a slightly higher treatment cost. Conclusion: AI-enhanced diagnostic tools significantly enhance the accuracy of treatment planning in orthodontic cases, leading to reduced treatment time, fewer appointments, and increased patient satisfaction. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Periodontal disease, characterized by inflammation and infection of the supporting structures of teeth, poses a significant oral health challenge. Traditional periodontal surgery and non-surgical therapy, such as scaling and root planing, are established treatment approaches for addressing periodontal disease. Materials and Methods: The study enrolled 120 adult patients diagnosed with moderate to severe periodontal disease. Participants were randomly allocated to one of two groups: the traditional surgery group (TSG) or the non-surgical therapy group (NSTG). In the TSG, patients underwent traditional periodontal surgery, which included flap surgery and grafts when deemed necessary. The surgical procedures were performed by experienced periodontal surgeons. In contrast, the NSTG received non-surgical therapy in the form of scaling and root planing administered by trained dental hygienists. Outcome measures encompassed clinical parameters and patient-centered outcomes. Periodontal pocket depth and clinical attachment level, both measured in millimeters, were assessed at baseline, 3 months, and 6 months. Patient-reported outcomes, including pain, discomfort, and satisfaction, were collected through standardized questionnaires at each follow-up visit. Results: Patients in the TSG experienced a notable reduction in pocket depth from a baseline of 6.8 mm to 3.7 mm at the 6-month mark, resulting in a change of -3.1 mm. Conversely, the NSTG exhibited a reduction from 6.7 mm to 4.0 mm, with a change of -2.7 mm. In the TSG, the baseline attachment level of 7.2 mm decreased to 5.1 mm at 6 months, indicating a change of -2.1 mm. In the NSTG, the attachment level decreased from 7.1 mm to 5.5 mm, resulting in a change of -1.6 mm. Patients in the TSG reported an average pain score of 3.6 on a 1–10 scale, discomfort of 4.2, and satisfaction of 7.8. In contrast, patients in the NSTG reported lower pain (2.1) and discomfort (2.9) scores but similar satisfaction levels (8.4). Conclusion: In this randomized controlled trial (RCT), both traditional periodontal surgery and non-surgical therapy demonstrated improvements in clinical parameters and patient-reported outcomes. Traditional surgery resulted in greater reductions in periodontal pocket depth and clinical attachment loss at the 6-month follow-up. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Dental restorations play a crucial role in preserving the structural integrity and function of posterior teeth. However, wear resistance remains a significant concern for these restorations. Materials and Methods: In this RCT, 120 participants with posterior tooth restoration needs were randomly assigned to two groups. Group A received conventional composite restorations, while Group B received NanoFilled Composite restorations. The restorations were placed according to standardized protocols. Wear resistance was assessed using a custom-designed chewing simulator, and the material wear was quantified using a profilometer. Patient-reported outcomes and clinical evaluations were also recorded at regular intervals over a 24-month follow-up period. Results: The wear resistance of the NanoFilled Composite restorations (Group B) was significantly higher than that of the conventional composite restorations (Group A) after 24 months of follow-up (P < 0.05). Profilometer measurements revealed that Group B had an average wear depth of 0.15 mm, while Group A had an average wear depth of 0.25 mm. Patient-reported outcomes indicated higher satisfaction and comfort in Group B. Clinical evaluations also demonstrated that Group B restorations had better retention and marginal integrity. Conclusion: This RCT demonstrates that NanoFilled Composite restorations exhibit superior wear resistance compared to conventional composite restorations when used in posterior teeth. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Dental caries is a prevalent oral health issue, often diagnosed through intraoral radiographs. The accuracy of Artificial Intelligence (AI) in diagnosing dental caries from these radiographs is a subject of growing interest. Materials and Methods: In this RCT, 200 intraoral radiographs were collected from patients seeking dental care. These radiographs were independently evaluated by both AI-based software and experienced human dentists. The software utilized deep learning algorithms to analyze the radiographs for signs of dental caries. The performance of both AI and human interpretations was compared by calculating sensitivity, specificity, and overall accuracy. Arbitrary values of 85% sensitivity, 90% specificity, and 88% overall accuracy were set as benchmarks. Results: The AI-based software demonstrated a sensitivity of 88%, a specificity of 91%, and an overall accuracy of 89% in diagnosing dental caries from intraoral radiographs. Human interpretation, however, yielded a sensitivity of 84%, a specificity of 88%, and an overall accuracy of 86%. The AI-based software performed consistently close to or above the predefined benchmarks, while human interpretation showed slightly lower accuracy rates. Conclusion: This RCT suggests that AI-based software is a valuable tool for diagnosing dental caries from intraoral radiographs, with performance comparable to or exceeding that of experienced human dentists. The consistent accuracy of AI in this context highlights its potential as an adjunctive diagnostic tool, which can aid dental professionals in more efficient and precise caries detection. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The interaction between type 2 diabetes and periodontal disease underscores the importance of exploring dietary interventions that could mitigate inflammation and improve periodontal health in diabetic patients. Materials and Methods: This randomized controlled trial included 100 patients with type 2 diabetes who were equally divided into two groups: Group A (low-carbohydrate diet) and Group B (control group). Patients in Group A followed a low-carbohydrate diet for 12 weeks, while Group B maintained their regular dietary habits. Periodontal health was assessed using clinical parameters such as probing depth (PD) and clinical attachment level (CAL), and inflammation was measured by analyzing levels of C-reactive protein (CRP) and interleukin-6 (IL-6). Statistical analyses were performed using appropriate tests. Results: After 12 weeks, Group A exhibited significant improvements in periodontal health compared to Group B. The mean PD reduction was 0.5 mm in Group A and 0.1 mm in Group B, with a corresponding mean CAL gain of 0.3 mm in Group A and no significant change in Group B. Inflammatory markers also showed favorable outcomes in Group A, with a decrease of 1.2 mg/L in CRP levels and 20% reduction in IL-6 levels. In contrast, Group B demonstrated minimal changes in inflammatory markers. The differences in PD, CAL, CRP, and IL-6 levels between the two groups were statistically significant (P < 0.05). Conclusion: The adoption of a low-carbohydrate diet for 12 weeks demonstrated significant improvements in periodontal health and reduction of inflammation in patients with type 2 diabetes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]