No abstract

Aim:The aim of the study is to compare the efficacy of different irrigation systems comparing irrigation with syringe and needle (Dispo Van), Max-I-Probe needle (Dentsply Maillefer), EndoActivator (Dentsply Maillefer), and EndoVac (Sybron Endo) in removing the smear layer generated at apical third.Materials and Methods:Instrumentation was done in 40 extracted premolars using different irrigation regimes (Group 1, saline and syringe; Group 2, Max-I-Probe needles with NaOCl and ethylenediaminetetraacetic acid (EDTA); Group 3, irrigant activation with EndoActivator using needlesNaOCl and EDTA; and Group 4, irrigation with EndoVac using needles NaOCl and EDTA).Statistical Analysis Used:The percentage of debris was seen with scanning electron microscope (SEM) and evaluated using one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA), Kruskal-Wallis test, followed by Mann-Whitney test for significance.Results:The mean score ± standard deviation for the conventional group was 2.8 ± 0.42 with median value of 3.00 (2-3). The results for the Max-I-Probe needle group were 2.3 ± 0.48 with median value of 2.00 (2-3) The mean debris score for EndoActivator group were 0.8 ± 0.42 with median value of 1 (0-1). The mean debris score for EndoVac group were 0.4 ± 0.52 with median value of 1 (0-1).Conclusion:EndoVac and EndoActivator performed much better than other available systems in removing the smear layer from apical third. So they should be incorporated as a regular part of the irrigation regime.

Closure of the surgical incision has been the primary function of sutures since their introduction. However, whatever the type, they are known to carry bacteria, which can be a source of infection. Five types of surgical sutures, Gut, Silk, Vicryl, PTFE, and Polyamide, were selected and tested on their ability to carry aerobic and anaerobic bacteria and were rated on the basis of forming colony-forming units (CFUs). Aerobic bacteria grown around gut sutures showed minimum CFUs (≈30 × 104/suture). Though very less anaerobic bacteria growth was seen among all tested suture materials, it was maximum around Vicryl and polyamide sutures. Every suture material is capable, albeit not equally, of holding bacterial biofilm formation, which can be a source of surgical site infection.

No abstract

To observe clinically and radiographically (CBCT), the extent of bone resorption in extraction socket without the use of bone graft substitutes and delayed implant placement. Material and methods: 50 compliant patients were selected for study. All the patients who were advised extraction were followed up for entire duration of the treatment, at 5th week CBCT showed horizontal and vertical bone loss. To prevent further bone resorption, after 5 weeks implant was placed along with bone graft. Results: Bone resorption after extraction is an unavoidable phenomenon. Clinical and radiographic (CBCT) analysis showed massive bone resorption by 5th week. At 5 month CBCT, all patients showed stable implant integration. There was no implant failure at the end of the study. Conclusion: Alveolar preservation is proven to slow down socket wall collapse with the use of a bone substitute material without which larger procedures maybe needed to restore alveolar integrity and harmony. Immediate implant placement is effective when bone graft is placed in the jumping distance.