No abstract

No abstract

Aim: This paper aims to assess the evidence in the literature reporting orthodontically induced inflammatory root resorption (OIIRR) in treatment with orthodontic clear aligners using 3D measurements. Materials and methods: Following preferred reporting Items for systematic reviews (PRISMA) statement, eight electronic databases were searched for relevant published and unpublished records. Data collected according to restricted inclusion and exclusion criteria. Results: A total of 236 articles were identified as relevant to our topic. Duplicates were excluded resulting in 226 papers, out of which 31 papers were relevant after screening titles and abstracts. Only 2 high-level evidence papers out of the 31 met the inclusion criteria for the qualitative synthesis. Conclusion: Based on the available studies with high level of evidence in the literature, we conclude that orthodontic clear aligners are non-inferior to light-force fixed orthodontic appliances, and superior to heavy-force fixed orthodontic appliances in terms of the risk for developing apical root resorption. Clinical significance: Orthodontists can be more assured about the low-risk of OIIRR associated with clear aligners compared to other orthodontic treatment modalities, and it remains up to the practitioner's assessment to select the appropriate treatment on a case by case basis.

Objective: To investigate the ability of undergraduate senior dental students in diagnosing orthodontic problems and to evaluate the clinical approach of these students toward a patient displaying such problems. Materials and Methods: Study was started after the approval by the Institutional Review Board of Riyadh Elm University RC/IRB/2018/1323 with registration number registration number FUGRP/2018/65. The sample consisted of 786 dental students at a private dental university in Riyadh city, and were assessed by questionnaires with closed questions. They were presented with photographs of patients with different types of malocclusions. Results: It was found that level 11 students showed better knowledge in diagnosing the different malocclusions presented in each case. With regards to gender, the female students were significantly more likely to diagnose the need for orthodontic treatment than male students. There was a significant difference between the levels on the interpretation of who could provide the orthodontic treatment. But respondents found it difficult to determine the ideal moment to start orthodontic treatment. Conclusion: On completion of their undergraduate courses, students encounter difficulties in diagnosing various orthodontic problems and even find it hard to articulate ideas about a basic treatment protocol to correct this malocclusion.