Immature necrotic permanent tooth presents a distinctive challenge for the endodontist. Various treatment modalities have been employed to create hard tissue barrier at the apex, which includes non-vital pulp therapy with calcium hydroxide, apexification with mineral trioxide aggregate, pulp revascularisation and regeneration. Regenerative endodontics is a novel modality which involves physiological replacement of the damaged structures of tooth like dentin, root and cells of the pulp-dentin complex. Numerous published case reports have revealed increased dentinal wall thickness, continued root development and apical closure, but there is still lack of sound scientific evidence regarding histological nature of the type of tissue. The current literature review was planned to summarise the evidence regarding the treatment of immature necrotic permanent teeth by regenerative endodontic procedures.
Aim:The objective of the present systematic review was to assess the outcomes of Hall technique (HT) on primary carious molars and compared it with the conventional dental restorations. Materials and methods: The systematic review was registered with Prospero registry (CRD42015020445) to answer the following research question: Is HT a better restorative option compared to other techniques for restoration of carious primary molars? In addition to exploring various health sciences databases, hand search was also done using following key terms in different permutations: (Hall technique OR Hall's technique OR preformed metal crown OR stainless steel crown) AND (caries OR carious molar OR deciduous tooth OR baby tooth OR milk tooth OR primary tooth). The outcome of interest was success of the restoration achieved with either method. Results: Five studies were included (two RCTs, one quasi-experimental trial, and two retrospective). A total of 1775 teeth were assessed, of which 1325 teeth were restored using HT. The retrospective studies showed no difference between HT and other methods whereas the RCTs and quasi-experimental favored HT over other treatment modalities. Meta-analysis significantly favored HT over conventional restorations [risk ratio 5.55 (3.31-9.30)] (p value ≤ 0.001). Conclusion: HT appeared demonstrated higher success and significantly outperformed the conventional restorations.
Formation of destructive haemorrhagic pseudocysts or pseudotumours thought to arise from unresolved, encapsulated haematomas is a well-recognized, rare complication of severe haemophilia A or B, and has been reported in a single patient with von Willebrand disease (vWD). We report a 41-year-old patient with type 3 vWD who underwent incomplete resection of a large retroperitoneal pseudocyst in 1995 and presented with a recurrent, extensive right abdominal and flank mass and signs and symptoms of large bowel obstruction. He required emergency partial colectomy for bowel ischaemia and removal of his right kidney, which was hydronephrotic due to prolonged ureteral obstruction by the pseudocyst. Following repeat partial resection of the pseudotumour, he developed persistent bleeding into the operative site despite aggressive administration of von Willebrand factor (vWF)-rich factor VIII concentrates, resulting in retroperitoneal haematomas and abscesses, which resolved after 13 months of percutaneous drainage, extended supplementation of vWF and antibiotic therapy.
Objective: To compare the effectiveness of rotary master apical file (RMAF) with ultrasonic activation of endodontic file (UAF) in the removal of silicon oil-based calcium hydroxide (SOBCH) from the canal. Methods: Ethical review committee approval and informed consent was obtained. 60 cases with necrotic teeth in which silicon oil-based intracanal medicament (Metapex) was to be placed were randomised in one of the two groups using sealed envelopes containing assignment codes for medicament removal: RMAF and UAF group. After standard protocol of coronal access, cleaning and shaping, silicon oil-based SOBCH was placed using a Lentulo spiral. A periapical radiograph was taken after SOBCH placement to check for adequate adaptation. On 7 th day, after instrumentation and medicament removal according to respective group, a second radiograph was taken to evaluate the effectiveness. Effectiveness was calculated using a graded scale in which 0 and 1 are effective and 2 and 3 are ineffective cleaning. Teeth were statistically analyzed using the Mann Whitney U and Chi-square test. Results: There was no statistically significant difference in the removal effectiveness of group RMAF and Group UAF at coronal (P=0.74) middle (P=0.71) and apical third (P=0.68). According to the graded score both techniques were equally effective in cleaning at all thirds of canal (RMAF=Apical: 1.09±0.70, Middle: 0.61±0.80, Coronal: 0.33±0.48 and UAC= Apical: 1.00±0.77, Middle: 0.52±0.74, Coronal: 0.28±0.46). Effectiveness of SOBCH removal using the two methods was not statistically significant between maxillary and mandibular teeth (P=0.35). Conclusion: Both the removal methods, Ultrasonic activation of file and Rotary master apical file, for SOBCH were equally effective in all the thirds of canal. And none of the techniques were able to completely remove the SOBCH. Effectiveness of SOBCH removal using the two methods was not statistically different between maxillary and mandibular teeth.
HighlightsGingivitis is one of the most prevalent diseases that affects 82% of adult population.This current protocol is effective at reducing the gingival inflammation.The use of alternate gel application of Chlorhexidine and Metronidazole showed improvement in the treatment of gingivitis.Need further implementation of the protocol followed by re-assessment.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.