Aim:This study aims to evaluate and compare microleakage at the occlusal wall and cervical wall in Class II cavities restored with one SonicFill Bulk Fill composite and two conventional Bulk Fill composites.Materials and Methods:Thirty freshly extracted teeth were divided into three groups of 10 teeth each. Standardized Class II cavities were made on the mesial and distal surfaces of each tooth and restored using SonicFill Bulk Fill composite and two conventional Bulk Fill composites, Tetric Evo Ceram, and X-tra fil. After storage, thermocycling and immersion in 0.6% rhodamine dye solution specimens were sectioned and evaluated for microleakage at the occlusal and cervical walls using confocal microscope.Statistical Analysis Used:Kruskal-Wallis test, Wilcoxon Signed-Rank test and Mann-Whitney U-test.Results:The results demonstrated that in the occlusal wall and cervical wall, SonicFill Bulk Fill composite, showed significantly less marginal microleakage than the other groups.Conclusion:Based on the results of this study, SonicFill Bulk Fill composite showed less microleakage than the other conventional Bulk Fill composites.

We describe a case of a patient undergoing open abdominal aneurysm surgery who developed a severe, lifethreatening allergic reaction immediately after administration of sugammadex. The manifestation was purely a cardiovascular collapse. The mainstay of treatment was administration of high-dose adrenaline and fluid resuscitation. The diagnosis of anaphylaxis was supported by a positive serum mast cell tryptase (93 μg/l) at one hour post-event. Sugammadex was confirmed as the cause of the anaphylaxis by a positive intradermal allergy test (25 mm diameter response to 1:100 dilution), with a normal saline control and a negative response to the other drugs used during the event. This case report is a reminder that the use of sugammadex is associated with rare but serious risks.

Background. Local anesthesia is given to decrease pain perception during dental treatments, but it may itself be a reason for pain and aggravate the dental fear. Computer-controlled local anesthetic delivery system (CCLADS) is one of the alternatives for decreasing the patients’ pain during local anesthesia. This study compared the time required for the recovery from anesthesia, pain/discomfort during injection and pain/discomfort 24 hours after administering local anesthesia with CCLADS, a standard self-aspirating syringe and a conventional disposable 2-mL syringe. Methods. The study was conducted on 90 subjects (an age group of 20-40 years), who suffered from sensitivity during cavity preparation. They were randomly divided into three groups of 30 individuals each to receive intraligamentary anesthesia (2% lignocaine with 1:80,000 adrenaline) using either of the three techniques: CCLADS, a standard self-aspirating syringe, or a conventional disposable 2-mL syringe. The onset of anesthesia, time required for recovery from anesthesia (in minutes), pain/discomfort during injection and pain/discomfort 24 hours after administering local anesthesia were recorded. Results. The time required for the onset of anesthesia and recovery from anesthesia was shorter with CCLADS (4.83±2.31 and 34.2±1.895, respectively) as compared to the standard self-aspirating group (10.83±1.90 and 43.5±7.581, respectively) and the conventional group (11.00±2.03 and 43.5±6.453, respectively) (P<0.001). The patients in the CCLADS group experienced no pain during local anesthesia administration as compared to the patients in the self-aspirating and conventional groups. The CCLADS and self-aspirating groups showed lower pain response as compared to the conventional group for pain after 24 hours. Conclusion. CCLADS can be an effective and pain-free alternative to conventional local anesthetic procedures.