No abstract

Objective: A randomized, double blind, split mouth, controlled clinical trial was conducted to evaluate the effect of two desen sitizing agents on reduction of Dentin Hypersensitivity (DH). Material and Methodology:A sample of 73 teeth from 13 patients, among which at least 3 teeth had dentin hypersensitivity, was randomly allocated into 3 treatment groups: Group A: treated with 30% ethenolic extract of Indian Propolis, Group B: treated with GC tooth mousse, and Group C: treated with sterile water. A Verbal Rating Scale (VRS) was used to record the degree of hypersensitivity, based on patient's response to tactile and air blast stimuli. The baseline scores were obtained. Each intervention group received applications of their respective agents consecutively on 1 st , 7 th , 14 th and 21 st days. After each application, the scores were recorded.Results: Both the 30% Indian Propolis and GC tooth mousse showed significant reductions in dentin hypersensitivity.Conclusion: GC tooth mousse was found to be significantly better in reducing the dentinal hypersensitivity as compared to Propolis and sterile water (p< 0.01).

Aims and Objectives:The aim of the study was to estimate and compare aspartate aminotransferases (AST) and alanine aminotransferases (ALT) levels in saliva and serum of insulin-dependent diabetes mellitus (IDDM) and normal children, and the objective was to evaluate the significance of these enzymes in assessing the salivary gland injury in IDDM children.Materials and Methods:The study group comprised of thirty children clinically and biochemically diagnosed for IDDM and thirty healthy children of similar age in the control group. Saliva and serum samples were collected and enzyme assay was performed by optimized ultraviolet test method (according to International Federation of Clinical Chemistry). The values obtained were subjected to statistical analysis using Mann–Whitney U-test for comparison of the variables and Karl–Pearson's coefficient test for correlation. The SPSS 16.0, (SPSS Inc., Chicago, USA) was used for statistical analysis.Results:Higher values of AST (mean = saliva 91.60 IU/L) and ALT (mean = saliva 94.93 IU/L) were found in the saliva than in serum (AST serum = 15.83 IU/L) (ALT serum = 20.80 IU/L) among the patients and the differences were statistically highly significant (P = 0.001). A similar comparison in the control group did not show statistical significant difference (saliva – AST mean = 23.50 IU/L, ALT mean = 21.95 IU/L and serum – AST mean = 12.60 IU/L, ALT mean = 13.25 IU/L). On correlation between patient and normal group, greater values of AST and ALT were observed in saliva of patients and the difference was statistically highly significant ([AST-mean = patients 91.166 IU/L and controls = 23.500 IU/L] [ALT-mean = patients 94.933 IU/L and controls 21.950 IU/L]). The serum values of patients and controls did not show statistical difference. Although higher values of salivary ALT and AST were observed in patients with the disease for 0–5-year clinical duration (ALT mean = 100.21 IU/L and AST mean = 95.39 IU/L) than those with the disease for 6–10-year duration (ALT mean = 77.57 IU/L and AST mean = 77.28 IU/L), values were statistically nonsignificant.Conclusion:Elevated salivary AST and ALT levels in IDDM patients suggest the injury to salivary glands and could aid as a salivary marker for the involvement of salivary glands in IDDM.

No abstract

Background: Chemomechanical caries removal (CMCR) is a noninvasive procedure that uses a chemical substance to remove the diseased dentin. The natural dental architecture is also preserved using this technique, preventing patient discomfort and pulp irritation. This method of eliminating caries is based on disintegration. This method removes soft carious dentin using chemical agents and non-traumatic mechanical force. This study was carried out to evaluate the clinical and microbiological evaluation of the chemomechanical caries removal agents in primary molars.Methods: For the elimination of caries, teeth in category I (polymer bur category) were treated with Smartburs II® (SS White Dental, Lakewood, New Jersey, United States) (n = 40). Teeth treated with the new Carisolv® technology (Mediteam, Sweden) to remove caries (n = 40). Teeth were treated for removal cavities in category III (conventional group) using excavators and carbon steel low-speed round burs from Dentsply Maillefer in Switzerland (n = 40). There was an evaluation of the efficacy of caries removal, the time required for caries removal, patient satisfaction, and microbial culture assessment.Results: In comparison to the other two categories, the conventional category median caries detector dye values were considerably lower (p value<0.05). There was no substantial difference observed between study participants belonging to category I and category II with a p-value greater than 0.05. Time taken during the removal of caries was substantially greater in category I (455.46±73.7) as compared to category II (129.21±44.18) and the traditional category (113.26±37.7). The value of significance was less than 0.05. Contrarily, no discernible difference was observed between category I and category III (the p-value was greater than 0.05). In comparison to the other two categories, the conventional group's median facial expression scale scores were substantially higher (p = 0.02). In comparison, there was no discernible difference between categories I and II (p = 0.65). It was observed that there was no substantial variation in three categories regarding the number of colonies of bacteria prior to the eradication of caries (p-value greater than 0.05). After caries had been removed, the number of living bacterial colonies in category I was noticeably greater than those in the other two categories. However, there was no discernible variation between category II and category 1 (p-value greater than 0.05). Conclusion:The mechanical approach has the highest clinical efficacy for removing caries. Carisolv required the most time to remove cavities. Patient satisfaction levels were greater with Carisolv than with the mechanical approach. It was also observed that Carisolv as well as the mechanical technique had greater antibacterial effectiveness.