No abstract

Purpose The aim of this study was to systematically screen the literature for studies reporting cosmetic material in the oral and maxillofacial complex to shed light on the types of cosmetic materials, their radiographic appearance, and possible complications. Materials and Methods Five electronic databases were reviewed for eligible studies. The general search terms were “cosmetic,” “filler,” “face,” and “radiograph.” Demographics, material types, clinical and radiographic presentation, and complications were recorded. Results Thirty-one studies with 53 cases met the inclusion criteria. The mean age was 52.6±15.4 years with a 4 : 3 female-to-male ratio. The most common material was calcium hydroxyapatite (CaHa) (n=14, 26.4%), found incidentally. The materials were generally located within the upper cheek and zygoma (n=35, 66.0%), radiographically well-defined (n=44, 83%), and had no effects on the surrounding structures (n=27, 50.9%). The internal structure was radiopaque (calcification, hyperdensity) for gold wires, CaHa, bone implants, and secondary calcification or ossification. Outdated cosmetic materials or non-conservative techniques were infiltrative, had effects on the surrounding structures, and presented with clinical signs, symptoms, or complications. Conclusion Conventional radiography, cone-beam computed tomography, and multi-detector computed tomography are useful to differentiate several cosmetic materials. Their magnetic resonance imaging appearance was highly variable. The infrequent inclusion of cosmetic materials in the differential diagnosis implies that medical and dental specialists may be unfamiliar with the radiographic appearance of these materials in the face.

OBJECTIVES: Extraction of mandibular posterior teeth followed by immediate implant placement is considered as an optimal technique of immediate prosthetic rehabilitation. The analysis of alveolar bone dimensions with Cone Beam Computerized Tomography prior to implant placement is a prime determinant in treatment planning. Hence this preliminary study was conducted to analyze the alveolar bone dimensions in dentate mandibular posterior teeth to evaluate the available bone which can be utilized for immediate implant placements. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Retrospective data of 200 cases of full volume CBCT was procured from Riyadh Elm University (REU) database and reviewed for eligibility. Atotal of 10 cases were included in the study. Scans were assessed for thickness of buccal and lingual walls at 4mm below the CEJ (MP1) and at midroot level (MP2). Alveolar width was assessed at most coronal point on alveolar bone (BW1) and at superior border of mandibular canal (BW2). The height was be calculated by measuring the vertical distance between BW1 and BW2. Data was tabulated and statistically analyzed using unpaired t-test. RESULTS: The results of our study indicates that dimensions of buccal and lingual bone walls of all teeth at MP1 and MP2 in PM1, PM2 and M1 were statistically significant. Also only the 1st premolar (PM1) showed statistical significance with regard to dimensions at BW1 and BW2. CONCLUSION: The present study highlights the need for further studies with larger samples which can impact the immediate implant success rates in mandibular posterior teeth.

Objective: The present study aims to measure the contamination level of gloves contained in an open box during dental procedures in the clinics of King Saud University, Dental Hospital, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia. Methods: a prospective invitro study for evaluating the contamination level of unused non-sterile latex gloves in dental clinics. Distance between the glove box and the dental chair was measured and grouped into two categories. The boxes were numbered and swabbed before opening. Two additional swabs were collected from the unused gloves at the beginning and end of each clinical session. The sample was then evaluated to identify type of bacteria and number of colonies.Results: 57.5% of contaminated second gloves were within 135cm distance while 70.83% of non-contaminated second gloves were located further than 135cm of the dental chair. For any given second glove placed more than 135cm, there is a decrease of 1.34cfu/ml compared to second gloves placed within 135cm. Conclusion: the study findings necessitate the importance of placing exposed glove boxes no less than 135cm from the source of aerosols to reduce the risk contaminating unused gloves.