The aim of this study was to investigate the physiological foramen diameter, shape and distance between physiological and anatomical apex of maxillary and mandibular first and second molars. Accurate knowledge of the physiological foramina morphology; thus, inherent mechanical shaping technical hindrances, is decisive when taking the corresponding root canal final preparation decision. The morphological dimensions of a total of 1727 physiological foramina were investigated by means of micro-computed tomography. Mean narrow and wide (to a high number, oval) diameters of the physiological foramen were 0.24, 0.22 and 0.33 mm and 0.33, 0.31 and 0.42 mm in mesiobuccal (MB), distobuccal (DB) and palatal (P) roots in maxillary first molars; 0.24, 0.22 and 0.33 mm and 0.41, 0.33 and 0.44 in MB, DB, and P roots in maxillary second molars. Mandibular first molars showed mean narrow and wide diameters of 0.24 and 0.30 mm and of 0.39 and 0.46 mm in mesial (M) and distal (D) roots; second mandibular molars showed 0.25 and 0.31 mm and 0.47 mm in M and D roots. The mean distance between the physiological foramina and anatomical apex was 0.82, 0.81 and 1.02 mm and 0.54, 0.43 and 0.63 mm in MB, DB and P roots of the maxillary first and second molars, respectively. A mean distance of 0.95 mm (M) and 1.05 mm (D) in the first and 0.78 mm (M) and 0.81 mm (D) in the second mandibular molars was observed. Based on the results obtained, assumable recommendations for final preparation size of the physiological foramen were calculated. However, when taking into consideration, the resulting standard deviations of marginal errors must be cautiously considered when taking a final decision in clinical endodontic treatment.

BackgroundThe aim of the study was to compare two frequently used dental age estimation methods for accuracy.MethodsA total of 479 panoramic radiographs in age groups 6–14 years from a German population were evaluated. The dental age of 268 boys and 211 girls was assessed by means of the method of Demirjian (1973) and Cameriere (2006) and compared with their actual chronological age.ResultsDemirjan’s method showed an overestimation of dental age compared to chronological age in all age groups for boys (mean difference −0.16, p = 0.010, range −0.35 to 0.09), age group 9 showed an underestimation. Using the same method for girls (mean difference −0.18, p = 0.008, range −0.45 to 0.13), an overestimation could also be shown in all age groups except for age groups 8 and 13. Results for Cameriere’s method showed for boys (mean difference 0.07, p = 0.314, range −1.38 to 3.83) in age groups 6 to 11 an overestimation, but in age groups 12 to14 an underestimation. The results for girls (mean difference 0.08, p = 0.480, range −1.55 to 4.51) showed an overestimation for age groups from 6 to 10, and an underestimation in age groups 11 to 14.ConclusionsThe comparison shows an advantage of Demirjian’s method for both genders. While Cameriere’s method showed a higher inaccuracy in all age groups, Demirjian’s method showed more appropriate results for dental age estimation of the investigated German population. To avoid errors in forensic age estimation and to prevent misidentifications for defendants in criminal processes, further studies of more precise methods for age estimation for the German population are required.

Objectives The aim of this pilot study was to evaluate the clinical and microbiological outcomes of light-activated disinfection (LAD) alone or combined with probiotics as an adjunct to non-surgical periodontal treatment. Materials and methods In this single-blinded, randomized, controlled clinical pilot study, 48 patients (28 females and 20 males) with untreated periodontitis (stages II and III, grade B) were included. Using a parallel-group design, patients were randomly assigned into 3 groups to receive subgingival debridement (SD) alone (group 1, n = 16), SD with LAD (group 2, n = 16), or SD with LAD plus probiotic treatment (group 3, n = 16). Probing pocket depth (PPD), clinical attachment level (CAL), bleeding on probing (BOP), gingiva-index simplified (GIs), plaque-control record (PCR), and subgingival microbiological samples were analyzed at baseline, 3 months, and 6 months of follow-up. Results All treatment modalities demonstrated clinical improvements in PPD and CAL at 6 months compared to baseline but without a statistical significant difference between the groups. The combination of SD + LAD + probiotic treatment (group 3) demonstrated significantly greater reductions in BOP, GIs, and red complex bacteria P. gingivalis and T. forsythia compared with other groups at 6 months (p < 0.05). Conclusions A single application of LAD as an adjunct to SD provided no additional clinical and microbiological benefits compared to SD alone. The combination of SD + LAD + probiotic treatment in group 3 led to further improvements of the inflammatory parameters. Clinical relevance The additional use of probiotics in periodontal treatment can be a useful approach to support inflammation and infection control of periodontal tissues. Further studies are necessary to determine the extent of added benefit for this treatment approach.

BackgroundAttention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) is defined as childhood neurobehavioural disorder. Due to short attention span, oral hygiene and dental treatment of such individuals can be challenging. Aim of this study was to evaluate the oral health of children and adolescents with and without ADHD living in residential care in rural Rhineland-Palatinate, Germany.MethodsIncluded in the study were 79 participants (male/female:58/21, age 9–15 years) living in residential care: 34 participants with ADHD and 45 participants without ADHD (control). Oral examination included the following parameters decayed, missing, filled teeth in the primary dentition (dmft), decayed, missing, filled surfaces/teeth in the secondary dentition (DMFS/DMFT), approximal plaque index (API), bruxism and orthodontic treatment. Additionally, oral hygiene, last dental visit and treatment performed, and dietary habits were assessed by questionnaire.ResultsThere were no significant differences in dmft, API, bruxism and oral hygiene habits between groups. However, participants with ADHD tended to have higher DMFS/DMFT values than the control group. Ongoing orthodontic treatment was found more often in the control group. The ADHD group tended to consume acidic/sugary beverages and sweet snacks more often than the controls. Different treatments (control visit/prophylaxis, dental therapy, orthodontic treatment) were performed at the last dental visit in the two groups.ConclusionsWithin the limitations of this study, oral health was similar in children and adolescents with or without ADHD from the same residential care setting. Parents/guardians need instructions for better supervision of oral hygiene and dietary habits to improve the poor oral health of children with or without ADHD.

(1) Background: The aim of this study was to assess oral health in children following dental treatment under general anaesthesia and to obtain information about oral health measures in both the children and their parents. (2) Methods: Children were scheduled for regular dental re-examination one to six years after dental treatment under general anaesthesia. Scores for mixed dmft/DMFT, the plaque control record (PCR), and the gingival bleeding index (GBI) were determined. Information about children’s/parents’ oral hygiene habits and frequency of dental visits was obtained. Scores for mixed dmft/DMFT as assessed before dental treatment under general anaesthesia/at re-examination were compared (Wilcoxon test). (3) Results: From the 134 parents initially contacted, 35 attended regular dental control visits (response rate: 26%) with their children (median age 6 years). Of the 35 children (20 female, 15 male), 18 (51.4%) were healthy and 17 (48.6%) had a pre-existing condition. Mixed dmft/DMFT scores determined at the recall visit differed significantly from the earlier visit (p = 0.006). Children had 1.74 ± 3.64 teeth newly affected by caries. Four children (11.4%) needed dental treatment under general anaesthesia again. Oral hygiene was mediocre (median PCR: 32%). The GBI was high (median: 14%). Children with a high PCR also had a high GBI. (4) Conclusions: Children who had received dental treatment under general anaesthesia still had a high caries risk. Further prophylaxis programs are necessary to prevent caries and further use of general anaesthesia.