Objective:The objective of this study was to assess the efficacy of ozone gas (O3) on the reduction of dry socket (DS) occurrence following surgical extraction of lower jaw third molars, influence of the indication for the extraction, and the difficulty of extraction on the incidence of DS.Materials and Methods:This study included thirty patients with bilaterally impacted third molars of mandible requiring surgical procedure for extraction. Following extraction, in the control group, saline solution was used for irrigation of extraction sockets and in the experimental group, intra-alveolar O3 was applied for 12 s (Prozone, W and H, UK, Ltd.). The surgeries were performed by the same oral surgeon. The follow-up visits were performed at 48 h and on day seven, postsurgery where the symptoms of DS were evaluated and intensity of pain has been recorded using visual analog scale 0–100.Results:In this pilot study, DS was present in 16.67% and 3.33% of cases in the control and experimental groups, respectively (P = 0.20).Conclusion:The application of O3 may reduce the incidence of DS and accelerates the recovery period after the surgery. Prophylactic use of O3 may be suggested in all patients, especially in the patients at a risk of development of DS.

The aim of this retrospective study was to evaluate the effect of removable partial dentures in periodontal abutment teeth in relation to the type of denture support and design of RPD in a five-year worn period. Methods : A total of 64 patients with removable partial dentures (RPDs), participated in this study. It were examined ninety-one RPDs. There were seventy-five RPDs with clasp-retained and sixteenth were RPDs with attachments. There were 28 females and 36 males, aged between 40-64 years, 41 maxillary and 50 mandible RPDs. For each subjects the following data were collected: denture design, denture support, and Kennedy classification. Abutment teeth were assessed for plaque index (PI), calculus index (CI), blending on probing (BOP), probing depth (PD), gingival recession (GR), tooth mobility (TM). Level of significance was set at p<0.05. Results : According to denture support of RPD, BOP, PD, PI, GR, CI and TM-index showed no statistically significant difference. Based on the denture design of RPD’s, BOP, PD, PI, CI, and TM-index proved no statistically significant difference. Except GR-index according to denture design confirmed statistically significant difference in RPD with clasp p<0.01. The higher values of all periodontal parameter as BOP, PD, PI, CI and TM were in patients with RPD’s with claps comparing with RPD’s with attachment. Conclusion : RPD’s with clasp increased level of gingival inflammation in regions covered by the dentures and below the clasp arms in abutment teeth.

Objective:The aim of this study was to evaluate the influence of removable partial dentures (RPD) on the periodontal health of abutment and non-abutment teeth.Materials and Methods:A total 107 patients with RPD participated in this study. It was examined 138 RPD, they were 87 with clasp-retained and 51 were RPD with attachments. The following periodontal parameters were evaluated for abutment and non-abutment teeth, plaque index (PLI), calculus index (CI), bleeding on probing (BOP), probing depth (PD) (mm) and tooth mobility (TM) index. These clinical measurements were taken immediately before insertion the RPD, then one and 3 months after insertion. The level of significance was set at (P < 0.05).Results:The mean scores for PLI, CI, BOP, PD, and TM index, of the abutment teeth and non-abutment teeth were no statistically significant at the time of insertion of RPD. After 1-month, PLI was statistically significant (0.57 ± 0.55 for abutment and 0.30 ± 0.46 for non-abutment teeth). After 3 months, there were significant differences between abutment and non-abutment teeth with regard to the BOP (1.53 ± 0.50 and 1.76 ± 0.43 respectively), PD (0.28 ± 0.45 and 0.12 ± 0.33 respectively) and PLI (1.20 ± 0.46 and 0.75 ± 0.64 respectively). No significant mean difference in TM and CI was found between the abutment and non-abutment teeth (P > 0.05).Conclusions:With carefully planned prosthetic treatment and adequate maintenance of the oral and denture hygiene, we can prevent the periodontal diseases.

Objective:The aim of the study was to analyze the distribution of color parameters, lightness (L*), chroma (C), hue (H), a* and b*, in the intercanine sector in maxilla.Material and Methods:Patients' tooth color measurements were performed using an intraoral spectrophotometer VITA Easyshade® (VITA Zahnfabrik H. Rauter GmbH and Co. KG, Bad Sackingen, Germany). The measurements were made in 255 subjects in the intercanine sector in maxilla.Results:The mean values for the group of 255 subjects were as follows: L*, a*, b*, C, and H as 81.6, 0.67, 21.6, 21.7, and 92.7, respectively. For F=206.27 and P < 0.001 between L*, a*, b*, C, H, and central incisor/lateral incisor/canines, there were statistically significant differences.Conclusion:With the statistical analysis, it was determined that there are significant color differences between the teeth of the intercanine sector, which differences are clinically significant also.

This retrospective clinical study aimed to assess patient’s satisfaction with removable partial dentures (RPDs), as retention, chewing ability, aesthetics during the observation period.Material and Methods:A total of 63 patients with RPDs, participated in this study. The following data was collected: Kennedy classification, denture design, denture support, satisfaction and success of RPD.Result:The results showed that 73.6% of patients were wearing RPD for the first time and were finally satisfied. According to the denture support of RPDs, clasp-retained quadrangular RPDs were 100% effective, followed by triangular dental support 81% and linear dental support 47.7%.Comparison of RPDs with attachment with RPDs with claps assessed through Fisher exact test, confirmed statistically significant difference (P=0.008), despite retention; however, chewing ability and aesthetics showed no statistically significant difference with X 2 test on patient’s satisfaction with RPD with or without attachment.Conclusion:Patients often would prefer not showing the anterior buccal clasps of RPD, therefore are generally satisfied more with RPD with attachment based on level of retention, chewing ability and aesthetics.