Introduction Extraction of teeth is followed by resorption of the residual alveolar ridge that continues throughout life resulting in loss of alveolar height and width. Of the numerous techniques that have been used to arrest post extraction alveoloar ridge resorption, the placement of a graft material inside the socket immediately after extraction has been mostly followed. Type 1 collagen is one of the commonly used graft material that prevent resorption by providing dimensional stability to the socket.Bisphosphonates are an anti-osteoclastic drug that prevent resorption by disrupting the membrane ruffling of the osteoclasts. Alendronate a bisphosphonate, is primarily used in diseases with bone loss. It has been used to reduce active bone resorption significantly without interfering with bone mineralization and quality. The need for the study is to examine the inhibitory effect of alendronate on residual ridge resorption when applied locally in combination with type I collagen on alveolar bone immediately following tooth extraction. Materials and Methods Twenty patients with age between 30 and 65 years were selected from the out patient department of The Oxford Dental College and Hospital. The patients were divided into two groups. In the first group after extraction of teeth from premolar to midline the sockets were irrigated with saline and sutured. On the left side type I collagen sponge was placed and sutured. In the other group the right side was treated the same way after extraction as in first group where as in the left side sockets type I collagen soaked in 20 mg/ml of alendronate was placed and sutured. Patients were evaluated clinically for any local irritation as well as radiologically with orthopantomograph X-rays were taken immediately after the extraction, 1 month after extraction and 4 months after extraction to determine the amount of bone loss prevented. Results The statistically significant bone loss prevented by the collagen alone was 22.8 % and in collagen with alendronate group was 44.38 % at the end of 4 months. Conclusion Type I collagen soaked with alendronate when placed in the socket immediately after extraction of teeth prevents post-extraction alveolar ridge resorption.

Objective The objective of the study was to assess the efficacy of propofol and midazolam as an intravenous sedative agent in minor oral surgical procedures in terms of: (a) the onset of action, (b) heart rate, (c) oxygen saturation, (d) systolic and diastolic blood pressure, (e) respiratory rate, (f) pain during the injection of sedative agent, (g) recovery period, (h) side effects, (i) patient's cooperation during the surgery. Methodology This was a double blind randomized study in which one group of 20 patients received propofol with the induction dose of 0.5 mg/kg and 50 lg/kg/min which was administered by syringe infusion pump as a maintenance dose and the other group received midazolam in a single dose of 75 lg/kg and no maintenance dose was given, instead 5 % dextrose was administered by syringe infusion pump at the rate of 50 lg/kg/min. Since propofol was milky white in colour, a green cloth was covered over the infusion pump in all cases. The surgeon, assistants and observers were blind about the medications which would be given to the patient for sedation. After the administration of the sedative, local anesthesia was achieved with 2 % lignocaine hydrochloride. Results The onset of action in propofol group was significant as onset of action was faster. The maximum increase in heart rate in propofol group was at 10 min intraoperatively (Mean ± 80.40 ± 12.73) and that in midazolam group was at 15 min intraoperatively (Mean 79.25 ± 13.44). Post operatively the heart rate decreased near to the baseline value in both the groups. The average oxygen saturation before induction in propofol group was 99.7 ± 0.73 % and that of midazolam group was 99.15 ± 01.31 P = 0.314. None of the patients in this study developed apnea. The systolic blood pressure (Mean ± SD) before induction in both the groups decreased from the baseline value after the administration of sedatives. The diastolic blood pressure (Mean ± SD) before induction in both the groups decreased from the baseline value after the administration of sedatives and the decreased diastolic blood pressure was maintained throughout the procedure. The respiratory rate (Mean ± SD) before induction in both the groups decreased from the baseline value after the administration of sedatives. The decreased respiratory rate remained throughout the surgical procedure. Pain during the injection of the sedatives was reported by nine patients (45 %) in the propofol group whereas none of the patients in midazolam group complained of pain during the injection. This is statistically significant (P = 0.001). The recovery time (Mean ± SD) in propofol group was 22.50 ± 3.04 (range 15-25 min) and that in midazolam group was 33.75 ± 3.93 (range 30-40 min), which was statistically significant (P \ 0.001). Patients in the propofol group were significantly less co-operative than midazolam group at both 10 and 25 min intra operatively. Conclusion The design of the present study permitted qualitative assessment of propofol and midazolam as sedative agents in minor oral surgical ...

Objectives1. To evaluate the efficacy of two plating system in comparison with single plating system 2. To study the biomechanical behaviour of single and two plating system when compression load is applied. Materials and Methods