Objectives This study aims to evaluate the effectiveness of upper Michigan occlusal splint (OS) compared to mandibular OS in terms of pain, range of motion (ROM), and muscle activity as assessed by surface electromyography (sEMG) in patients affected by muscle-related temporomandibular disorders (TMD). Patients and methods In this randomized-controlled trial, a total of 40 adult patients (13 males, 27 females; mean age: 47.2±12.8 years; range, 22 to 56 years) with a diagnosis of myofascial pain, lasting from at least three months on at least one masseter muscle. The patients were randomly allocated into two groups: Group 1 (n=20) using upper Michigan OS and Group 2 (n=20) using mandibular OS. At baseline (T0), at one (T1), three (T2), and six months (T3), the following outcomes were assessed: myofascial pain by Visual Analog Scale (VAS) and ROM of mandible movements, activity of the main masticatory muscles through sEMG. Results There were no significant intra-group differences in the outcome measures assessed in both groups. However, Group 2 had a significantly higher right lateral mandibular ROM at T2 (7.1±3.1 vs. 9.8±2.3, respectively; p<0.05) and a significantly higher left lateral mandibular ROM at T3 (7.6±3.5 vs. 10.5±2.1, respectively; p<0.05). We found no significant difference in none of the sEMG parameters. Conclusion Our study results suggest that OS, independently from being built on the upper or lower arch, seems to not have significant effects in reducing pain over a six-month period in TMD patients.

The present paper evaluated the accuracy of two different methods for transferring working length (WL) between manual endodontic instruments and nickel–titanium (NiTi) shaping files. Thirty root canals of extracted permanent teeth were used. Root canals were divided according to canal length (CL) and canal curvature (CC). The reference cusp and the root end were flattened to provide reproducible and accurate measurements. During shaping, the WL measurements were obtained with manual k-files (KF) and transferred to WaveOne (W1) NiTi reciprocating files using the traditional method with the endodontic ruler (method I) and an alternative clinical procedure based on the comparison of the instruments side by side from tip to shank (method II). For each file and each tested method, two measures were taken by two examiners using Rhino (ver. 4.0, McNeel, Seattle, WA, USA) software for a total of 360 (30 × 3 × 2 × 2) measures. Analysis of variance was performed by taking the difference in length (Delta WL, DWL) between files used for the same canal. The difference between methods I and II for WL transfer was found to be statistically significant (df = 1; F = 71.52; p < 0.001). The DWL absolute values obtained with method II were found to be closer to 0 mm (i.e., same length as corresponding KF) than those obtained with method I. Both CL (df = 2; F = 1.27; p = 0.300) and CC (df = 1; F = 2.22; p = 0.149) did not significantly influence WL measurements. With respect to WL transfer, method II seemed to better preserve the correct WL transfer between instruments during the clinical endodontic procedures.

Many studies report that maxillofacial growth is influenced by genetic and environmental elements and that incorrect breathing, chewing, sucking, and swallowing are promoting factors of malocclusion. This study aims to evaluate the function and the influence of the tongue positions in patients with Angle class III malocclusion, maxillary hypoplasia, and posterior crossbite. One hundred patients, aged between 6 and 12 years old, were enrolled for the study. In the first group, patients with a diagnosis of class III malocclusion, affected by maxillary hypoplasia, skeletal class III, and posterior dental crossbite were recruited. In the control group, not treated patients with no malocclusion, skeletal class I, and without posterior dental crossbite were selected. Regarding atypical deglutition, no statistical differences were reported between the two groups, and 14% of patients reported ankyloglossia. Statistical differences were found in tongue rest position and during the execution of “hold and pull” and “chuck” exercises. Results obtained in this observational study showed that the clinician (orthodontist or general dentist) should analyze the presence/absence of atypical swallowing, the anatomical and functional aspects, and the tongue behavior in the rest position.