Background: Orthodontic treatment success does not only depend on proper diagnosis and treatment, but also on patient’s compliance. Patient’s progress and compliance can be monitored through in-office visits at certain time intervals. However, this interval is not necessarily ideal for every patient. Purpose: To overcome this limitation, Dental Monitoring® (DM) is introduced as artificial intelligence (AI) driven remote monitoring, which analyzes tooth movement, oral hygiene, and the condition of orthodontic appliances. This study aimed to describe the clinical application of DM based on the number of in-office visits, duration of treatment, number of refinements, stability of retention phase, tooth movement, patient's oral hygiene, and patient’s subjective perception regarding DM. Review: Based on five articles included, the use of DM during orthodontic treatment had several advantages including the increase of patient’s compliance on maintaining oral hygiene and significant reduction of in-office visits, thus increasing the treatment’s effectiveness and comfort for patients. Duration of treatment and number of refinements that do not differ significantly between DM and non-DM users are considered as DM’s other advantages as it could reduce in-office visits without compromising treatment’s effectiveness. Orthodontic relapse can also be identified hence severe relapse can be prevented. Conclusion: The clinical application of DM can reduce in-office visits, improve oral hygiene and retention stability. However, the use of DM must be carefully considered to prevent decline in doctor-patient relationships

Background: Peri-implantitis is one of many factors that can cause implant failure, with common cases ranging from 1%-47% and the highest incidence ranging from 10.7%- 47.2%. Mechanical debridement (MD) is currently the standard for peri-implantitis treatment. However, MD has limitations in the removal of infected tissue. Moreover, the rough texture of the implant’s surface and bacteria adhesion and colonization increases the difficulty in performing MD. To overcome these limitations, adjunct therapy is needed to increase peri-implantitis treatment effectiveness. One of those adjunct therapies, photodynamic therapy (PDT), is used to destroy bacterial cells and significantly reduce inflammatory cell infiltration around the implant. Purpose: To describe the effectiveness of PDT as an adjunct therapy to MD in periimplantitis treatment through narrative review. Review: PDT is effective in reducing the number of bacteria, plaque index (PI), bleeding on probing (BOP), probing depth (PD), crestal bone loss (CBL), and excessive proinflammatory cytokines (IL-6, IL-1β, TNF-α) in patients. However, the effectiveness of PDT can be influenced by several factors, including patients’ conditions, such as diabetes and smoking habits, types of photosensitizers used, and exposure time. Conclusion: PDT is an effective adjunctive therapy to MD in peri-implantitis treatment since it can improve clinical parameter values, significantly reduce P. gingivalis, and decrease proinflammatory cytokines.

Background: Irrigation is an essential step in root canal treatment (RCT). However, the complex structure of the root canal can limit the penetration of irrigants, causing RCT failure. Shock wave enhanced emission of photoacoustic streaming (SWEEPS) has been developed to improve root canal cleaning by increasing the penetration of irrigants. SWEEPS utilized the Er:YAG laser to generate micropulse, producing bubbles delivered in liquid, causing powerful photodynamic streaming. However, its superiority compared to conventional irrigation remains unclear. Thus, we aim to review the available evidence to assess the benefits of SWEEPS over conventional irrigation. Purpose: This study aims to review the available evidence to assess the benefits of SWEEPS over conventional irrigation. Reviewa: Article searches were conducted on Pubmed, ScienceDirect, EBSCOhost, and ProQuest using SWEEPS and root canal irrigation as keywords. Articles were included if they aim to assess the benefits of SWEEPS over conventional irrigation in removing smear layer, debris, pulp tissues, or bacteria. A total of 833 articles were initially retrieved from systemic search of literature and 6 articles following inclusion criteria were included in the review. Out of 6 articles, 4 articles suggested that SWEEPS could increase the removal of smear layer, debris, pulp tissues, and bacteria in the root canal compared to conventional irrigation. However, 2 articles found contradictory results, in which SWEEPS and conventional irrigation had similar outcomes in terms of penetration depth and could not completely eradicate biofilm. Conclusion: This review suggests that SWEEPS offers more benefits over conventional irrigation since it can improve the removal of smear layer, debris, pulp tissues, and bacteria in the root canal.